^J2 55 

1-137 



tJ'ld t '( < n :. (-Ct< (du (On. 
'U.S. f:nt£ 



To the Honorable Senate, House of Representatives, and 
Court of Claims, of the United States. 



CLAIMS 



OF THE 



OFFICERS OF THE REVOLUTION, 

TNDER THE RESOLVE OF OCTOBER 21, 1780. 



ALSO, 



Claims for Seven Years Half Pay to the 
Widows and Children, 

UNDER THE RESOLVE OF AUGUST 24, 1780. 

FROM A "BOOK ON PRIVATE CLAIMS." 



BY NATHANIEL HATCH, 
Counsellor at Law, 514 Twelfth street. 



WASHINGTON, D. C. 
1857. 



tt'37 



To the Honorable Senate, House of Representatives, and 
Court of Claims, of the United States. 



CLAIMS 



OF THE 



OFFICERS OF THE REVOLUTION, 

ODER THE RESOLVE OF OCTOBER 21, 1780. 



ALSO, 



Claims for Seven Tears Half Pay to the 
Widows and Children, 

UNDER THE RESOLVE OF AUGUST 24, 1780. 

FROM A "BOOK ON PRIVATE CLAIMS." 



BY NATHANIEL HATCH, 
Counsellor at Law, 514 Twelfth street. 



WASHINGTON, D. C. 

1857. 



F~ 






"06 



BRIEF 

OF THE 

LAWS AND ARGUMENT 



IN BEHALF OF 



THE HALF-PAY CLAIMS, 

UNDER THE RESOLVE OF OCTOBER 21, 1780. 



These claims consist of three several and continuous considerations, 
which were finally, by the act of October 21, 1780, blended in one 
entire contract : 

1. Grants of land by the resolves of September 16 and 18, 1776 ; 

2. Seven years half pay by the resolve of May 15, 1778 ; 

3. Seven years half pay in specie or current money, October 3, 1780 ; 
All, in addition to the land, to induce the officers and soldiers to serve 

during the war, and the promise of seven years half pay made to the 
supernumerary officers. 

The act of October 21, 1780, was passed after the Government hnd 
become utterly insolvent ; after it had repudiated and scaled all of its 
most sacred debts; after it had, by the acts of March and April lc v , 
and June 28, 1780, declared that all of the Government paper which 
had issued, or should thereafter issue, to be of the value of two dollars 
and fifty cents to the hundred. 

That the resolve of October 21, 1780, constituted a solemn contract 
with each officer for grants of land and half pay during life. The prom- 
ise of land was blended with and made a part of the same entire con- 
sideration with the half-pay portion of the contract. The acknowledg- 
ment, presentation, or record, of the one, was the presentation, prom,' 
ise, and record, of the other. The suspension of the acts of limitation 
of one portion would equally affect the other. These were vested rights, 
and the contract could not be varied, rescinded, or impaired, by any 
subsequent acts of legislation, without the consent of each officer, indi- 



IV 

vidually. Their rights were not affected by substituting the act of 
March 22, 1783, for five years full pay — 1. Because that resolve was 
not passed until after the peace, after the contract had been fulfilled 
on the part of the officers ; 2. Because the officers were expressly pro- 
hibited from expressing their dissent to the same; 3. Because it was 
passed at a time when it was well known to Congress that the Govern- 
ment were hopelessly insolvent, and had no power to comply with the 
conditions of that resolve, and ought not to have any binding force upon 
them. That it was merely a proposition to compromise a debt which 
had already accrued, which utterly failed, andtherefore should make no 
difference whether they assented to it or not. It could not impair their 
rights under the original contract. 

The depreciated certificates sent to the officers were a part of the 
resolve of 1783, as much so as if it had been attached ; and as the 
interest was payable at the end of each year, the omission to pay the 
interest for a single year was not only a repudiation of the certificate, 
but also of the terms and conditions of the resolve itself, and did not 
repeal or affect the resolve of 1780. 

The certificates sent to a captain, purporting to be of the value of 
$2,400, at the time it was sent, was, by the laws of April and June, 1780, 
of the value of only $60, and could not be an accord and satisfaction 
of only that amount. 

3. Notwithstanding the Government continued during all the period 
of its existence hopelessly insolvent, and unable to pay even a single 
year's interest, refused to permit the officers to return their commuta- 
tion in their own or other certificates, but confined that privilege to the 
invalid corps, they were worth no more to the officers than any cer- 
tificates, and the detention or disposition of those certificates at their 
legal value could not have been of any injury to the Government, inas- 
much as by law they were worth only two and a half dollars to the 
hundred ; and if the Government allowed any more to strangers, it was 
to benefit holders and speculators, and in violation of the duty of 
Congress. 

4. The rights of the claimants who survived were fully discussed by 
Congress, upon the report of the committee; for the act of May 15, 
1828, restoring the surviving officers to their original rights as payeos, 
not pensioners, but creditors of this Government ; and the act of May 15, 
1828, and the many subsequent acts of Congress, are some of the laws 
of the United States made by Congress, in pursuance of the Constitu- 
tion, which are the legislative construction and declaration of the rights 
of these claimants, which that Constitution declares "shall be the 



supreme law of the land," and restored the heirs of those officers who 
had deceased, as well as the living, to their original rights. This act 
made no deduction of the amount of commutation which had been or 
or which might thereafter be paid to any of said officers or their heirs, 
nor that payments made under said act of 1828 should be in full of 
said claims. The words of the act did not make the money payable to 
such officers as were entitled to commutation, but to those officers who 
were "entitled to half pay under the resolve of October 21, 1780." 
No language could be more express in the recognition of the original 
contract of 1780 than the act of May 15, 1828. 

In addition to this act, are the many subsequent acts of Congress 
giving to the same officers who received the amount of fourteen years 
half pay under this act, an additional amount of five years full pay in 
specie, together with interest, and this at intervals between 1828 and 
1838. That a special act or general act of Congress in behalf of a large 
number of the same class of claimants, resting upon the same contract, 
is a legislative construction and declaration of the rights of all the oth- 
ers. That the renewal of a promise or the acknowledgment of a debt 
to one of ever so many obligees or payees, is an acknowledgment and 
promise to all named in the same contract ; equal and impartial justice 
being one of the great fundamental principles of the Constitution and 
the laws of our Government. 

Grants of land were an addition to the money portiou of the contract 
of 1780. The issuing of warrants and patents, and the record of the 
same, to the officers, are a presentation and acknowledgment and 
renewal of the promise of the money half-pay portion of the contract, 
and coextensive in all its relations between the officer and the Govern- 
ment, and cannot be separated. The time for receiving the land portion 
of the contract having been extended to the 26th of June, 1858, also 
extends to the half-pay portion, at least up to that time. 

The claimants further urge, that the substitution of the act of 1788 
instead of that of 1780, by the old Confederacy, and the act of the new 
Government prohibiting any suit against the United States in behalf 
of any of its creditors, was an entire suspension of the half-pay contract. 
And the old Confederacy having terminated without having paid any 
portion of said commutation certificates, was a full repudiation of the 
certificates and the resolve of 1783. The record of those certificates, 
land warrants, and patents, were the presentation, record, and evidence, 
of the original claim, and a bar against all limitation acts. 

A law which confers a benefit or gratuity may impose conditions as 
a part of that consideration ; but contracts already existing, which 



VI 

become vested rights, are not subject to be impaired or rescinded by 
subsequent legislation, statute of limitation, or otherwise. The Gov- 
ernment of the United States having established a court " to hear and 
determine all claims founded upon any law of Congress, or upon any 
contract, express or implied, with the Government of the United States," 
virtually by that act itself admits the parties for the Jirst time to their 
rights as creditors, and cannot, after having declined the payment of 
claims for so many years, set up any statute of limitation as a bar to 
the claims. This act is virtually a suspension of all acts of limitation 
to all claims which existed against the Government before its passage. 

The act does not authorize the court to consider any claim paid by 
any acts of limitation. The resolve of 1783 was founded entirely on 
the imperative necessity and exigency of the Government — a mere 
proposition and an attempt to compromise a debt, by substituting a new 
promise for a less amount, without security for the pledged faith of the 
nation for a much larger sum ; which having utterly failed, and to the 
great injury of the claimants, left them to resort to their original 
contract. 

It should not be forgotten, that Congress created, by positive law, 
two several and distinct classes of currency, which existed at the time 
these contracts with the officers were made. And the important dis- 
tinction between them was then recognised by both parties. 

One consisted of specie, the other of the bills or certificates of the 
Government, worth, at the time the contracts were made, on the 
third and twenty-first days of October, 1780, only two and a half dol- 
lars to the hundred. These contracts were expressly made payable in 
specie or current money, and not in the valueless certificates of the 
Government ; and this just distinction is recognised in the act of March 
22, 1783. 

Keeping this fact in view, as the basis of the contract, it is impossi- 
ble to imagine that these valueless certificates, sent to the officers, could 
have been intended as a compliance with the expressed requirements of 
either act. The amount of the specie consideration of the seven years 
half pay named in the resolve of October 3, 1780, and which was in- 
cluded in that of the contract of October 21, 1780, being $1,680, 
would, of itself, purchase, for each Captain, over sixty-seven thousand 
dollars of these Government certificates ; and be it remembered, that 
this valuation was made by Congress itself. Who, then, can say that 
where the contracts were originally founded upon the specie basis, made 
payable in specie, or its equivalent, that the certificates of the Govern- 
ment, sent to the officers, could have been an accord and satisfaction 



toward this specie consideration, for any greater amount than they 
were worth by law, and for which they passed as currency 1 And the 
claimants say, Congress having pledged the public faith to these 
officers to preserve and -protect this preferred specie consideration, 
they were in duty bound to have excluded all these commutation cer- 
tificates, while in the hands of strangers, from the funding act of August 
4, 1790. 



Washington, D. C, 
514 Twelfth street, November, 1857. 
The Government of the United States having established a Court " to hear and de- 
1 termine all claims founded upon any law of Gongress, or upon any regulation of an 
' Executive Department, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Govern- 
• ment of the United States, which may be suggested to it by a petition filed therein, 
1 and also all claims which may be referred to said Court by either House of Congress," 
has induced the author to compile and publish a work, entitled 

"BOOK OF PRIVATE CLAIMS, 

UNSETTLED AND UNPAID BY THE UNITED STATES." 



The Court of Claims have endeavored to limit the powers of their 

jurisdiction as much as possible, • and have decided that in order to 

justify a decision in favor of a claimant, his claim must in all cases be 

founded upon some legal right. This principle, the court say, has 

been adopted in cases of Todd vs. the United States, and Lindsay vs. 

the same : " The court has not regarded itself as a council, to advise 

Congress what was just and equitable; nor as a jury, to exercise a 

merely discretionary authority." " When a claim has been referred 

to them by either House of Congress, they have not supposed that the 

whole power of Congress over the matter was thereby delegated, but 

that they were to report their decision whether the claim was founded 

upon any legal right.'" Their opinion has been, that what was 

required by general principles " of justice, irrespective of law, was a 

matter, the decision of which was not intended to be conferred upon 

the court. " 

One object of the compilation of this work on. Private Claims has 
been, to elicit the attention of Congress to the importance of first dis- 
posing of those claims which are founded upon express contracts of 
the Government, especially where one contract may embrace a large 
class of claimants, of which each one is equally entitled ; and in many 
cases where Congress may have admitted and paid claims to individ- 
uals of the same class, founded upon the same contract, but leaving a 
large majority of them unprovided for. Where the delay has been 
such, on the part of Congress, that the original parties to whom the 
same was due have deceased, Congress, being the law-making power, 
have always exercised the right of saying to whom the same shall be 
paid. If the consideration of the contract was such, that public policy 
and humanity induced Congress to protect it to the payee — as in the 



acts of May 15, 1828 ; June 7, 1832 — by the same right they could 
extend that protection, and order of priority of payment, to the heirs 
of the original grantees or payees. 

The most important claims — those which have remained the greatest 
period of time unpaid, for which Congress declared the " faith of the 
nation hath been pledged," and the most numerous — are those of the 
officers of the Revolution, embraced in the resolves of Congress of 
October 21, 1780, which constituted a solemn contract with those 
officers for half pay during life, whose services, sufferings, and for- 
tunes, gave to the people their liberty and a republican Government, 
enjoyed as much now as then, and which is descending with all its 
greatness and blessings to all future generations, embracing considera- 
tions of too great magnitude to be described or disregarded. 

As those claims were viewed by Washington, and regarded by Con- 
gress, as having been founded upon considerations which were to give 
them a precedence over all other claims of the Government, contracted 
at a time after the Government had utterly failed, and the contract 
resting entirely upon the good faith of the nation for a prospective 
reward, I have thought it best to subjoin a concise history of the events 
which terminated in a basis of the contract for " half pay during 
life." 

Although, even at this late period of time, the justice, expediency r , 
and policy, of the laws on which those claims are founded, are denied 
by some, yet we are bound to regard them as laws, and binding upon 
the Government ; and more especially, since they have been so pro- 
nounced and confirmed by many hundred of subsequent acts of Con- 
gress. 

Congress, by their resolve of June 15, 1775, after the Lexington 
affair, April 19, 1775, adopted the army raised in the Northern States, 
and elected George Washington Commander-in-chief. On the 21st of 
July, 1775, he was authorized to keep a force in Massachusetts, as 
he may deem necessary, not to exceed 22,000 men. 

The army was increased from time to time, by the enlistment of 
soldiers for short terms. 

It became necessary that the army should be increased, and Con- 
gress resolved to raise eighty-eight battalions, to be enlisted for the 
war, as soon as possible. 

In order to induce officers and soldiers to make such an important 
engagement, Congress proposed to make them grants of lands, and did 
so, bv their resolves of September 16, 1776; September 18, 1776; 
August 12, 1780; September 22, 1780. 

BOUNTY LAND ACTS IN BEHALF OF OFFICERS AND SOLDIERS OF THE 
REVOLUTION, WHO ENGAGED FOK THE WAR. 

To provide for the raising of eighty-eight battalions, to serve for the war. 

" Resolved, That, in addition to a money bounty of twenty dollars 
' to each non-commissioned officer and private soldier, Congress make 
' provision for granting lands, in the following proportions, to the 
' officers and soldiers who shall engage in the service, and continue 



therein to the close of the war, or until discharged by Congress, 
and to the representatives of such officers and soldiers as shall be 
slain by the enemy. Such lands to be provided by the United States ; 
and whatever expense shall be necessary to procure such land, the 
said expense shall be paid and borne hy the States, in the same pro- 
portion as the other expenses of the war, viz : to a colonel, five hun- 
dred acres ; to a lieutenant colonel, four hundred and fifty acres ; to 
a major, four hundred acres ; to a captain, three hundred acres ; to a 
lieutenant, two hundred acres; to an ensign, one hundred and fifty 
acres; each non-commissioned officer and soldier, one hundred acres. 

[Resolution — In Congress, September 16, 1776.] 

" Resolved, That the bounty and grants of land offered by Congress, 
by a resolution of the 16th instant, as an encouragement to the officers 
and soldiers to engage to serve in the army of the United States 
during the war, shall extend to all who are, or shall be, enlisted for 
that term ; the bounty of ten dollars, which any of the soldiers have 
received from the continent, on account of a former enlistment, to be 
reckoned in part payment of the twenty dollars offered by the said 
resolution : That no officer in the continental army be allowed to hold 
more than one commission, or to receive pay but in one capacity, at 
the same time. [Resolution — In Congress, September 18, 1776.] 

" Resolved, That the provision for granting lands, by the resolution 
of September sixteenth, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six, 
be and is hereby extended to the general officers, in the following 
proportion: to a major general, one thousand one hundred acres; to 
a brigadier general, eight hundred and fifty acres. 

[Resolution — In Congress, August 12, 1780.] 

11 Congress resumed the consideration of the report of the Committee 
on the Medical Department; and, on the consideration of the follow- 
ing, it was 

" Resolved, That the several officers of the medical department, 
except the clerks and stewards, shall, at the end of the war, be enti- 
tled to a certain provision of land, in the proportion following, to 
wit : the director to have the same quantity as a brigadier general ; 
chief physicians and purveyor, the same as a colonel ; physicians and 
surgeons, and apothecary, the same as a lieutenant colonel ; regi- 
mental surgeons, and assistants to the purveyor and apothecary, the 
same as a major ; hospital and regimental surgeon's mate, the same 

as a captain." [Resolution — In Congress, September 22, 1780.] 

On the 3d of October, 1780, Congress reorganized the army, and 
extended the grants of land to those officers who became supernu- 
meraries. 

Grants of land was the first inducement embraced in the engagement 
to serve during the war. 

This was declared by the act of September 16, 1776, to be, " in 
addition " to the promise of their monthly pay and bounty money. 

In order to defray the expenses of the war, Congress, by their re- 
solve of 3d October, 1776, established a loan office in each State, and 



for continental money or specie paid in, certificates were ordered to be 
given for the amount, promising the payment of the principal at future 
periods, and that the interest should be paid annually where the money 
was loaned. This system went into full operation, loans were made 
and largely increased by two emissions of the continental money of May 
20, 1777, and April 11, 1778. 

THE NECESSITY OF A HAL-FPAY ESTABLISHMENT AS AN INDUCEMENT 
TO SERVE DURING THE WAR. 

A further consideration and still stronger inducement to serve during 
the war, appear from the following : 

Extract of a representation made by General Washington to a Committee of Congressj 

January 29, 17*8. 

" Gentlemen : The numerous defects in our present military estab- 

* lisments rendering many reformations and many new arrangements 
i absolutely necessary, and Congress having been pleased to appoint 
i you a committee, in concert with me, to make and recommend such 

* as shall appear eligible, in pursuance of the various objects in their 

* resolution for that purpose, I have, in the following sheets, briefly 
' delivered my sentiments upon such of them as seemed to me most 
i essential, so far as observation has suggested and leisure permitted. 

* These are submitted, and 1 shall be happy if they are found con- 

* ducive to remedying the evils and inconveniences we are now subject 
' to, and putting the army upon a more respectable footing. Something 
i must be done — important alterations must be made — necessity requires 
i that our resources should be enlarged and our system improved ; for 
4 without it, if the dissolution of the army should not be the conse- 
6 quence, at least its operations must infallibly be feeble, languid, and 

* ineffectual. 

" As I consider a proper and satisfactory provision for officers, in a 

* manner, as the basis of every other regulation and arrangement neces- 

* sary to be made, since without officers no army can exist ; and unless 
' some measure be devised to place those of ours in a more desirable 

* situation, few of them would be able, if willing, to continue in it. 

" I shall begin with a few reflections, tending to prove the necessity 
' of a 'Half-Pay Establishment.' » 

M A small knowledge of human nature will convince us, that, with 

* far the greatest part of mankind, interest is the governing principle, 

* and that almost every man is more or less under its influences. Motives- 

* of public virtue may for a time, or in particular instances, actuate 
4 men to the observance of a conduct purely disinterested 5 but they 

* are not of themselves sufficient to produce a persevering conformity 

* to the refined dictates and obligations of social duty. 

" Few men are capable of making a continual sacrifice of all views 

* of private interest or advantage to common good. It is in vain to 
6 exclaim against the depravity of human nature on this account ; the 

* fact is so ; the experience of every age and nation has proved it ; and 
' we must in a great measure change the constitution of man, before 

* we can make it otherwise. No institution not built on the presump- 
' tive truth of these maxims can succeed. 



" We find these exemplified in the American officers, as well as in 
all other men. At the commencement of the dispute, in the first 
effusions of their zeal, and looking upon the service to be only tempo- 
rary, they entered into it without paying any regard to pecuniary or 
selfish considerations. But finding its duration to be much longer than 
they at first suspected, and that, instead of deriving any advantage 
from the hardships and dangers to which they were exposed, they on 
the contrary were losers by their patriotism, and fell far short even 
of a competency to supply their wants, they have gradually abated in 
their ardor ; and, with many, an entire disinclination to the service, 
under its present circumstances, has taken place. To this, in an 
eminent degree, must be ascribed the frequent resignations daily hap- 
pening, and the more frequent importunities for permission to resign, 
and from some officers of the greatest merit. To this, also, may we 
ascribe the apathy, inattention, and neglect of duty, which pervade all 
ranks, and which will necessarily continue and increase, while an 
officer, instead of gaining everything, is impoverished by his commis- 
sion, and conceives he is conferring, not receiving, a favor, in holding 
it. There can be no sufficient tie upon men possessing such senti- 
ments. Nor can any method be adopted to oblige those to a punctual 
discharge of duty who are indifferent about their continuance in the 
service, and are often seeking a pretext to disengage themselves from 
it. Punishment in this case will be unavailing ; but when an officer's 
commission is made valuable to him, and he fears to lose it, you may 
then exact obedience from him. It is not, indeed, consistent with 
reason or justice to expect that one set of men should make a sacri- 
fice of property, domestic ease, and happiness, encounter the rigors 
of the field, the perils and vicissitudes of war, to obtain those bless- 
ings which every citizen will enjoy in common with them, without some 
adequate compensation. It must also be a comfortless reflection to 
any man, that after he may have contributed to securing the rights of 
his country, at the risk of his life and the ruin of his fortune there 
would be no provision made to prevent himself and family from sink- 
ing into indigence and wretchedness. Besides adopting some method 
to make the provision for officers equal to their present exigencies, a 
due regard should be paid to futurity. Nothing, in my opinion, would 
serve more promptly to reanimate their languishing zeal, and interest 
them thoroughly in the service, than a half-pay establishment. 
This would not only dispel the apprehension of personal distress at 
the termination of the war, from having thrown themselves out of 
professions and employments they might not have it in their power to 
resume, but would in a great degree relieve the painful anticipation 
of leaving their widows and orphans a burden on the charity of their 
country, should it be their lot to fall in its service. 

11 1 am earnest in recommending this measure, because I know it 
is the general wish and expectation; and that many officers, whom, 
upon every principle, we should wish to retain in the service, are only 
waiting to see whether something of the kind will or will not take 
place, to be determined in their resolutions either of staying in or 
quitting it immediately ; and I urge my sentiments with the greater 



freedom because I cannot, and shall not, receive the smallest benefit 
from the establishment, and can have no other inducement for pro- 
posing it than a full conviction of its utility and propriety. 
" I am sensible the expense will be a capital objection to it ; but to 
this I oppose the necessity. The officers are now discontented with 
their situation. If some generous expedient is not embraced to remove 
this discontent, so extensive a desertion of the service will ensue, and 
so much discouragement be cast upon those who remain, as must 
wound it in a very essential manner. Everything that has this effect 
has a tendency, at least, to protract the war, and,, though dictated 
by a well-intended frugality, will, I fear, in the end, prove erroneous 
economy." 
Congress, being fully convinced of the propriety and necessity of 

making some further provision for the army, were pleased to pass the 

following resolutions : 

IN CONGRESS, MAY 15, 1118. 

" Resolved, unanimously, That all military officers commissioned by 
' Congress, who are now or hereafter may be in the service of the 
' United States, and shall continue therein during the war, and not 
' hold any office of profit under these States, or any of them, shall, 
' after the conclusion of the war be entitled to receive annually for the 
' term of seven years, if they live so long, one half of the present pay 
' of such officers : Provided, That no general officer of the cavalry, 
' artillery, or infantry, shall be entitled to receive more than the one 
' half part of the pay of a colonel of such corps, respectively : And 
1 provided, That this resolution shall not extend to any officer in the 
' service of the United States, unless he shall have taken an oath of 
1 obligation to, and shall actually reside within, some one of the United 
1 States. 

u Resolved, unanimously, That every non-commissioned military 
L officer and soldier who hath enlisted or shall enlist into the service of 
6 these States for during the war, and shall continue therein to the end 
' thereof, shall be entitled to receive a further reward of eighty dollars 
' at the expiration of the war." 

In addition to the foregoing resolutions, Congress was pleased to make 
the following resolve, calculated to afford that relief to the unfortuuate 
and distressed which humanity and gratitude demanded : 
IN CONGRESS, AUGUST 24, 1780. 

" Resolved, That the resolution of the 15th May, 1778, granting 
half-pay for seven years to the officers of the army who should con- 
tinue in service to the end of the war, be extended to the widows of 
those officers who have died or shall hereafter die in the service ; to 
commence from the time of such officer's death, and continue for the 
term of seven years ; or if there be no widow, or in case of her death 
or intermarriage, the said half pay be given to the orphan children of 
the officer dying as aforesaid, if he shall have left any." 
All the schemes of the Government to carry on the war by the aid of 
loan offices utterly failed; and hence, as early as March 18, 1780, 
Congress was obliged to relinquish the hope of redeeming the Govern- 



ment paper, (much of it then being in the hands of the officers,) and on 
the 18th of April, 1780, passed a resolution " that the principal of all 

* certificates taken out since the 18th of March, 1780, should be dis- 

* charged at the rate of one Spanish milled dollar, or the current ex- 

* change thereof in other money at the time of payment, for forty dol- 

* lars of the said bills of credit secured on loan ; and that the principal 

* of all certificates that should thereafter be taken out, until the further 

* order of Congress, be discharged at the same rate and in the same 
4 manner as those that had been taken out since the 18th of March, 
1 1780." 

Here, then, was the public declaration of the utter insolvency of the 
Government, as early as the 18th of March, 1780. The army being 
unpaid for past services, the relation of creditor and debtor had thus 
become entirely changed. 

In this desponding state of public affairs, it was found necessary to 
present some still greater inducement, if possible, which might influence 
the officers to continue in the service, and often to supply themselves 
and corps the best manner they could, Congress resolved that the re- 
stricting clause in the resolution of 15th May, 1778, granting half pay 
to the officers for seven years, expressed in these words, viz : " and not 
to hold office of profit under these States, or any of them," be, and is 
hereby, repealed. 

These resolutions for a short time produced the desired effect ; but 
the increasing distress of the army in the subsequent years, arising 
from the inability of the public to perform their engagements, caused 
such discontents and uneasiness, that alarming consequences were feared. 
At the same time, the reform of the army, which was proposed to take 
place by the resolution of Congress of the 3d October, 1780, not a little 
irritated the officers. 

On the 3d of October, 1780, Congress reorganized the army, to take 
effect on the 1st of January, 1781, the effect of which was to throw 
many of the officers out of service. They therefore at the same time 
adopted the following resolution : 

" And whereas, by the foregoing arrangement, many deserving officers 
6 must become supernumerary , and it is proper that regard be had to 

* them : 

" Resolved, That from the time the reform of the army takes place, 

* they be entitled to half pay for seven years, in specie, or other current 

* money equivalent, and also grants of land at the close of the war, 

* agreeably to the resolution of the 16th of September, 1776." 

It will be observed, by the following letter of General Washington, 
that it became necessary, inasmuch as there were no funds in the 
Treasury, to offer some strong inducement by pledging the honor of the 
nation for some prospective reward, and all were embraced in the re- 
solve of October 21, 1780. 

Transcript of a letter from General Washington to the President of Congress, dated near 
Passaic Falls, October, 11, 1780. 

" That there are the most conclusive reasons for reducing the number 
i of the regiments, no person acquainted with the situation of our affairs 



8 

1 and the state of the army will deny. A want of officers, independent 
' of other considerations, were sufficient to compel us. But that the 

* temper of the army, produced by its sufferings, requires great caution 
c in any reforms that are attempted, is a position no less evident than 
' the former. In services the best established, where the hands of 
' Government are strengthened by the strongest interests of the army 
1 to submission, the reducing its regiments and dismissing great part of 
1 its officers is always a measure of delicacy and difficulty. In ours, 
' where the officers are held by the feeblest ties, and are mouldering 
' away by daily resignations, it is peculiarly so. The last reduction 
' occasioned many to quit the service, besides those who were reformed, 
1 and left durable seeds of discontent among those who remained. 

" The general topic of declamation was, that it was as hard as dis- 
' honorable for men who had made every sacrifice to the service, to be 
( turned out of it at the pleasure of those in power, without an adequate 
' compensation. In the maturity to which their uneasinesses have now 
' arisen, from a continuance in misery, they will be still more impatient 
' under an attempt of a similar nature. How far these dispositions 
' may be reasonable, I pretend not to decide ; but in the extremity to 
1 which we are arrived, policy forbids us to add new irritations. Too 
' many of the officers wish to get rid of their commissions, but they are 
' not willing to be forced to it. It is not the intention of these remarks 
' to discourage a reform, but show the necessity to guard against the 
' ill effects, by an ample provision both for the officers who stay and 
1 for those who are reduced. This should be the basis of the plan, and 
' without it, I apprehend the most mischievous consequences. This 
' would obviate many scruples that will otherwise be found prejudicial 
' in the extreme. I am convinced Congress are not a little straitened 
1 in the means of a present provision so ample as to give satisfaction ; 
' but this proves the expediency of & future one, and brings me to that 
' which I have so frequently recommended as the most economical, the 
' most politic, and the most effectual, that could be devised — a half 
' pay for life. Supported by the prospect of a permanent depend- 
' ence, the officers would .be tied to the service, and would submit to 
' many momentary privations, and to inconveniences which the situation 

* of public affairs make unavoidable. This is exemplified in the Penn- 
' sylvania, who, being upon this establishment, are so much interested 
c in the service that, in the course of many months, there has been only 
' one resignation in that line," [the Pennsylvania line.] 

Soon after the reception of the foregoing letter, Congress were pleased 
to pass the resolutions of October 21, 1780, hereto annexed. 

Congress had no means to comply with the resolve of October 3, 
1780, by which the Government promised to pay the supernumerary 
officers an amount of seven years half pay, in specie or current money, 
from 1st day of January, 1781. This promise was made after the Gov- 
ernment had utterly failed. Hence the wisdom of Washington, and 
the policy of the Government, in blending these officers who were on the 
retired list in the contract of half pay for life of October 21, 1780. 



HALF PAY FOR LIFE TO SUPERNUMERARY OFFICERS, UNDER THE RE- 
FORM OF THE ARMY, TO TAKE EFFECT ON THE 1st JANUARY, 1781. 

" [1780, October 21.] — Resolved, That the Commander-in-chief, and 
commanding officer in the Southern department, direct the officers of 
each State to meet and agree upon the officers for the regiments to be 
raised by their respective States, from those who incline to continue 
in service ; and where it cannot be done by agreement, to be deter- 
mined by seniority, and make return of those who are to remain ; which 
is to transmitted to Congress, together with the names of the officers 
reduced, who are to be allowed half pay for life. 

" That the officers who shall continue in" the service to the end of the 
war shall also be entitled to half pay during life, to commence from 
the time of their reduction. 

" [1780, November 28.] — Some doubts having arisen in the minds of 
the general officers, whether the resolution of the 21st October last, 
granting half pay for life to the officers who shall remain in service to 
the end of the war, was meant to extend to them : 

" Resolved, That the said half pay for life be extended to all major 
generals and brigadier generals who shall continue in service to the 
end of the war. 

" That the resolution of the 21st October was so meant and in- 
< tended." 

ALLOWANCE DURING LIFE IN LIEU OF HALF PAY TO THE OFFICERS OF 
THE HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT AND MEDICAL STAFF. 

" [1781, January 17.] — Whereas, by the plan for conducting the 
hospital department, passed in Congress the 30th day of September 
last, no proper establishment is provided for the officers of the medi- 
cal staff, after their dismission from public service ; which, consider- 
ing the custom of other nations, and the late provision made for the 
officers of the army after the conclusion of the war, they appear to 
have a just claim to ; for remedy whereof, and also for amending sev- 
eral parts of the above-mentioned plan — 

" Resolved, That all officers in the hospital department and medi- 
cal staff hereinafter mentioned, who shall continue in service to the 
end of the war, or be reduced before that time as supernumeraries, 
shall be entitled to and receive during life, in lieu of half pay, the 
following allowance, viz : 

'' The director of the hospital, equal to the half pay of a lieutenant 
colonel. 

" Chief physicians and surgeons of the army and hospital, and hos- 
pital physicians and surgeons, purveyor, apothecary, and regimental 
surgeons, each equal to the half pay of a captain." 

HALF PAY FOR LIFE TO CHAPLAINS. 

" [1781, May 8.] — Resolved, That the Commander-in-chief be and 
he is hereby authorized and directed to arrange the brigade chaplains 
of the several State lines serving with the army, and the commanding 
general of the Southern army those of the line serving with that army, 
so as to retain in service no more chaplains of each line than are equal 
to the number of brigades. 



10 

" That every chaplain deemed and certified to the Board of War to 
i be supernumerary be no longer continued in service, and be entitled 
' to have their depreciation made good, and to the half pay of captains 
' for life." 

RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, DECEMBER 31, 1781. 

" Resolved, That all officers of the line of the army, below the rank 
of brigadier general, who do not belong to the line of any particular 
State or separate corps of the army, and are entitled by acts of Con- 
gress to pay and subsistence, shall have the same, with the deprecia- 
tion of their pay, made good to the first day of January, 1782. 

" Resolved, That the Secretary of War be and he is hereby directed 
to make returns to Congress, on or before the 20th day of January, 
1782, of the names and rank of all the oflicers necessary to be retained 
in service, that are included in the preceding resolution. 

" Resolved, That all oflicers included in the foregoing description, 
and whose names shall not be inserted in the returns directed to be 
made by the preceding resolution, shall be considered as retiring from 
service on the first day of January, 1782 ; provided, always, that 
nothing contained in these resolutions shall be construed so as to pre- 
vent or hinder any officer that shall retire as aforesaid from enjoying 
all the emoluments that he may, upon retiring, be entitled to by any 
former acts of Congress." 

RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, MARCH 8, 1785. 

" Resolved, That the oflicers who retired under the resolve of the 
' 31st of December, 1781, are equally entitled to the half pay or com- 
' mutation, with those officers who retired under the resolves of the 3d 
' and 21st October, 1780." 

The good results which this contract produced may be seen from an 
extract of a letter from General Washington in 1783, showing the happy 
consequences resulting from the passage of the resolution of 21st Octo- 
ber, 1780, granting half pay, and contrasting the state of the army 
between the two periods : 

" That, in the critical and perilous moment when the last-mentioned 
' communication was made, there was the utmost danger a dissolution 
1 of the army would have taken place, unless measures similar to those 
' recommended had been adopted, will not admit of a doubt. That the 
t adoption of the resolution granting half pay for life has been attended 
' with all the happy consequences I had foretold, so far as respected 
' the good of the service, let the astonishing contrast between the state 
' of the army at this instant and at the former period determine. 

11 And that the establishment of funds, and security for the payment 
' of all the just demands of the army, will be the most certain means 
i of preserving the national faith and future tranquillity of this exten- 
' sive continent, is my decided opinion. 

" By the preceding remarks, it will readily be imagined, that, instead 
i of retracting and reprehending (from further experience and reflec- 
' tion) the mode of compensation so strenuously urged in the enclosures, 
* I am more and more confirmed in the sentiment ; and if in the wrong, 



11 

suffer me to please myself with the grateful delusion. For if, beside 
the simple payment of their wages, a further compensation is not due 
to the sufferings and sacrifices of the officers, then have I been mista- 
ken indeed. 

" If the whole army have not merited what a grateful people can 
bestow, then have I been beguiled by prejudice, and built opinion on 
the basis of error. 

" If the country should not in the event perform everything which 
has been requested in the late memorials to Congress, then will my 
belief become vain, and the hope that has been excited void of found- 
ation. 

" And if (as has been suggested, for the purpose of inflaming their 
passions) the officers of the army are to be the only sufferers by this 
resolution ; if, retiring from the field, they are to grow old in poverty, 
wretchedness, and contempt ; if they are to wade through the vile mire 
of dependency, and owe the miserable remnant of that life to charity 
which has hitherto been spent in honor, then shall I have learned what 
ingratitude is ; then shall I have realized a tale which will embitter 
every moment of my future life. But I am under no such apprehen- 
sions. A country rescued by their arms from impending ruin; will 
never leave unpaid the debt of gratitude. 

"G. WASHINGTON." 

Thus it appears that the half pay for life was not only promised to 
those officers by one resolve of Congress, of October 21, 1780, but the 
same was repeated four times subsequently. 

Those resolves have never been repealed, but are, in point of con- 
tracts under them, in full force. 

There being no positive repeal of the provisions of the act of 1780, 
a virtual or implicative repeal of an act is only permitted where there 
is some repugnance to the last act and the former. (Attorney General, 
Nov. 17, 1828.) Both acts of 1780 and 1783 recognise the obliga- 
tion ; the latter is only a proposition in relation to the mode of pay- 
ment. 

This position is sustained by the resolve of January 26, 1784. In 
answer to applications for half pay, Congress resolved " that half pay 
* cannot be allowed to any officer, or to any class or denemination of 
' officers, to whom it has not heretofore been expressly promised" — 
still receiving applications under the law of October 21, 1780, and 
recognising the law, but rejecting the claims only because they did not 
come within the provisions of the law of 1780. The law is again 
recognised as such by the act of the 8th of March, 1785. 

Many of the officers, up to that time, had already given five years 
service, and expended their fortunes, to carry on the war. It was after 
the Government had become so utterly bankrupt, at the earnest request 
of Washington, that the promise of seven years half pay was increased 
to that of half pay during life ; and such had become the depreciation 
of the credit of the Government, that a promise of full pay would have 
appeared more compatible with the condition of the public finances, than 
that of half pay for life. 



12 

It is admitted that Congress had the power to make contracts ; that 
the contract, guarantying to each officer half pay during life, was made 
during the time the Government was utterly insolvent. After it had 
failed — at a time when no promises of the Government were worth 
more than two and half dollars to the hundred, when Congress could 
not, upon any principles of honor, promise the officers any considerable 
amount in gross — it could only, during that great exigency, pledge the 
honor of the nation, that if they would serve to the end of the war, 
conquer a peace, each of them should be entitled to half pay during 
life — not to pay them in the same depreciated paper in which they 
had been paid. And this became a vested right, which could not be 
varied, rescinded, or impaired, by any subsequent act of legislation ; 
nor could any other act of Congress be substituted in its place, without 
the assent of the officers individually. 

In discussing the merits of these claims, it is well to consider their 
progress, and the many considerations they contained. They were the 
deliberate and voluntary acts of Government, founded in justice, equity, 
public policy, and public exigency. They embraced the results of three 
previous promises, which constituted one continuous consideration : 
1st. Grants of land, before the failure of the Government, September 
16, 1776. 2d. Seven years half pay, May 15, 1778. 3d. Seven 
years half pay, in specie or current money, October 3d, 1780, pay- 
able to the supernumerary officers, which was after the Government 
had failed. 4th. While the Government was thus hopelessly insolvent, 
and could not discharge the seven years half pay, it was during this 
insolvency of the Government, while the promises of the Government 
were by a permanent law worth only two and a half dollars to the hun- 
dred, that all these unredeemed promises were all blended in the con- 
tract of October 21, 1780 — all finally resting upon the faith of the 
nation, and the success of the efforts and perseverance of the officers. 
This contract, therefore, was not founded on the depreciated currency. 
It was virtually the first mortgage of the real and personal effects of 
the Government, and therefore has, or should have, a preference to all 
other claims. 

The claimants say, and the facts find, that the Government continued 
to remain insolvent during the whole period of the war, and failed to 
supply the officers with good and sufficient food, whereby they were 
obliged to expend their own private fortunes ; that neither the old nor 
the new Confederacy has ever paid the large sums advanced, arrears of 
pay, or their half pay, promised under the resolve of October 21, 1780 ; 
that the provisional articles of peace between the United States and 
Great Britain were signed November 30, 1782 ; the treaty between 
France and Great Britain, on which the efficacy of those articles were 
conditioned, was executed on the 20th January, 1783 ; and the defini- 
tive treaty of peace was signed at Paris, September 3, 1783, and rati 
fied by Congress, January 14, 1784. 

That notwithstanding it was well known to Congress that a peace 
had been obtained, the Government being unable to pay to the soldiers 
and officers specie or current money, sufficient to defray their expenses 
to their destitute homes, for that reason could not disband the army ; 



13 

that they postponed their declaration of the cessation of hostilities until 
the 11th day of April, and on the 23d of April, 1783, Congress 
declared that the time the men engaged to serve, " during the war," 
did not expire until the ratification of the treaty of peace, but author- 
ized the Commander-in-chief to grant furloughs or discharges, which 
Was a mere expedient, founded on that necessity, and postponed until 
the 14th of January, 1784 ; that Congress, by resolves of May 25, 
June 11, and September 26, 1783, directed parts of the army to be 
furloughed, and, by their proclamation of the 18th of October following, 
discharged absolutely, after the 3d November, 1783, such parts of the 
Federal army as had been furloughed by the several previous acts ; 
that in this manner this patriotic army was disbanded, and, for the 
want of means, sent penniless to their homes, without the certificates 
of service. 

There is, however, conclusive evidence that the officers and soldiers 
discharged their duty nobly, and during all that long struggle submitted 
to sufferings and deprivations with a patience and patriotism never be- 
fore exhibited by any race of people. They performed their part of 
the contract, almost without their pay, and often without food. 

Their names were duly returned to the War Department. The 
amount of their annual pay was a fixed sum; they had nothing further 
to do ; they became entitled to grants of land, and their annual half 
pay during life. 

Their claim became a matter of record. It required no further 
presentation. It was, in law, always presented ; and there it stands, 
a life estate — a vested right — that could not be affected by any subse- 
quent legislation. 

In order to encourage their disappointed hopes, and offer some com- 
pensation for the inevitable delay of payment, which the impoverished 
treasury could not fail to predict, on the 3d of June, 1784, Congress 
passed the following resolution : 

" That an interest of six per cent, per annum shall be allowed to all 
* creditors of the United States, for supplies furnished, or services 
i done, from the time the payment became due." 

This extended to all their arrears of pay long due, as well as to 
their half pay. Chief Justice Gilchrist, in a recent decision, in allu- 
ding to this resolve, says : 

" No language could be more express or free from doubt than this. 
The resolution was passed, from a feeling that it was just and right 
that interest should be paid from the time the half pay became due ; 
and it was a volunflltry contract on the part of the United States, 
constituting a legal claim against them, which no subsequent legisla- 
tion could release, without the consent of the other party." "It 
may be added, that up to the year 1837, there was paid interest on 
1,510 claims of widows and orphans, and claims of officers for per- 
sonal services — the statute of limitation as to such claims having 
been suspended." 

The claimants further say, that section 1 of the 6th article of the 
Constitution provides, " That all debts contracted and engagements 
i entered into before the adoption of this Constitution shall be as valid 



14 

{ against the United States, under this Constitution, as under the Con- 
' federation." 

2. " This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall 

* be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall 
4 be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme 
1 law of the land ; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, 
' anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary not- 

* withstanding." 

3. " The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the 
' members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judi- 
' cial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall 
' be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution." 

The act of Congress of March 22, 1783, admits the claim of the 
officers which accrued under the resolve of October 21, 1780, for half 
pay, to have been such a debt and engagement as is contemplated by 
the Constitution ; " for which (says the resolve) the faith of the Uni- 
' ted States hath been pledged ; " " whose services and sufferings have 

* so just a title to the approbation and rewards of their country." 

Here, then, as early as 1783, Congress declared those claims to be 
founded, not upon a gratuity, but on a solemn contract, made between 
the Government and the officers, wherein they are declared as legal 
creditors of the Government. Therefore, as the honor of the country 
was "pledged" for the fulfilment of the contract, justice would seem 
to demand the inquiry. 

At what time and in what way were these debts paid 1 When and in 
what way has the i public faith, thus "pledged," ever been " redeemed 1 " 

It is sometimes alleged that the contract for half pay for life was 
changed to that oijive years' full pay. by the following resolve of 22d 
March, 1783 : 

RESOLUTION OF MARCH 22, 1783. 

" On the report of a committee, consisting of Mr. Hamilton, Mr. 
Dyer, and Mr. Bedford, to whom was referred a motion of Mr. Dyer, 
together with the memorial of the officers of the army, and the report 
of the committee thereon, Congress came to the following resolutions : 

" 1. Whereas the officers of the several lines under the immediate 
command of his Excellency General Washington, did, by their late 
memorial, transmitted by their committee, represent to Congress that 
the half pay granted by sundry resolutions was regarded in an unfa- 
vorable light by the citizens of some of these States, who would pre- 
fer a compensation for a limited term of years, or by a sum in gross, 
to an establishment for life ; and did, on that account, solicit a com- 
mutation of their half pay for an equivalent in one of the two modes 
above mentioned, in order to remove all subject of dissatisfaction from 
the minds of their fellow -citizens : And whereas Congress are desirous 
as well of gratifying the reasonable expectations of the officers of the 
army as removing all objections which may exist in any part of the Uni- 
ted States to the principle of the half pay establishment, for which the 
faith of the United States hath been pledged ; persuaded that those 
objections can only arise from the nature of the compensation, not 



15 

from any indisposition to compensate those whose services, sacrifices, 
and sufferings, have so just a title to the approbation and rewards of 
their country : 

" 2. Therefore, resolved. That such officers as are now in service, 
and shall continue therein to the end of the war, shall be entitled to 
receive the amount of five years' full pay in money or securities on 
interest at six per cent, per annum, as Congress shall find most con- 
venient, instead of the half pay promised for life by the resolution of 
the 21st day of October, 1780 ; the said securities to be such as shall 
be given to other creditors of the United States ; provided it be at the 
option of the lines of the respective States, and not of officers, indi- 
vidually, in those lines, to accept or refuse the same; and provided, 
also, that their election shall be signified to Congress, through the 
Commander-in-chief, from the lines under his immediate command, 
within two months, and through the commanding officer of the South- 
ern army, from those under his command, within six months from the 
date of this resolution : 

" 3. The same commutation shall extend to the corps not belonging 
to the lines of particular States, and who are entitled to half pay 
for life, as aforesaid ; the acceptance or refusal to be determined by 
corps, and to be signified in the same manner, and within the same 
time, as above mentioned : 

" 4. That all officers belonging to the hospital department, who are 
entitled to half pay by the resolution of the 17th day of January, 1781, 
may collectively agree to accept or refuse the aforesaid commutation, 
signifying the same through the Commander-in-chief, within six months 
from this time ; that such officers as have retired at different periods, 
entitled to half pay for life, may, collectively, in each State of which 
they are inhabitants, accept or refuse the same ; their acceptance or 
refusal to be signified by agents authorized for that purpose, within 
six months from this period ; that, with respect to such retiring offi- 
cers, the commutation, if accepted by them, shall be in lieu of what- 
ever may be now due to them since the time of their retiring from 
service, as well as of what might hereafter become due ; and that so soon 
as their accceptance shall be signified, the superintendent of finance 
be and he is hereb} r directed to take measures for the settlement of 
their accounts accordingly, and to issue to them certificates, bearing 
interest at six per cent. ; that all officers entitled to half pay for life, 
not included in the preceding resolution, may also collectively agree 
to accept or refuse the aforesaid commutation, signifying the same 
within six months from this time." 

Half pay forbidden, except to those officers to whom it is heretofore promised. 
RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, JANUARY 26, 1784. 

" On the report of a committee, consisting of Mr. Williamson, Mr. 
Tilton, and Mr. Monroe, to whom were referred a memorial of Joseph 
Ward, and a petition of R. Forthingham, 

" Resolved, That half pay cannot be allowed to any officer, or to any 
class or denomination of officers, to whom it has not heretofore been 
expressly promised." 



16 

Certain officers entitled to half pay or commutation. 
RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, MARCH 8, 1785. 
C{ Resolved, That the officers who retired under the resolve of the 

* 31st of December, 1781, are equally entitled to the half pay or com- 

* mutation with those officers who retired under the resolves of the 3d 
' and 21st October, 1780." 

It is also alleged that certain commutation certificates of the Pay- 
master General, which were sent to the officers, were a valid accord and 
satisfaction that they were a fair equivalent for the half pay for life. 

But the claimants say that the resolve of 1783 was passed after the 
peace — after the contract of 1780 had been fulfilled on the part of the 
officers ; that it was a mere proposition to compromise a debt which al- 
ready existed, that they never gave their assent to the proposition, and 
that it did not repeal the act of 1780, is admitted by the subsequent re- 
solve of March 8, 1785, in which the right to half pay is expressly de- 
clared to be due to certain other officers ; and they say that the resolve 
of 1783, or any acts under it, ought not to have any binding force upon 
them — 

1. Because the resolve of 1783 expressly excludes the officers indi- 
vidually from expressing their dissent to the same ; that it was a prop- 
osition of expediency, founded entirely upon the imperative necessities 
of the Government, it being well known to Congress that the Govern- 
ment had no power to comply with either of its conditions, viz : to pay 
specie or give security, and was finally repudiated by the old and new 
Government, and therefore could not be of any binding force on the 
officers, even if they had assented to all of the propositions. That 
those commutation certificates were payable with interest annually. 
The omission to pay the interest annually was a repudiation of the 
conditions, not only of the certificates, but also of the resolve of 1783, 
upon which they were issued. 

2. That the certificates sent to the officers were a part of the resolve 
of 1783, as much so as if a copy of the same had been attached to each 
of them ; that they were not money or security which would command 
"six per cent, per annum," and of no more value than the depreciated 
certificates which they then held. 

3. That the resolves of 18th March, 18th April, and 28th of June, 
1780, were in full force, by which all the certificates of the Government, 
which had issued, or which should thereafter issue, are declared to be 
of no more value, and to be discharged at the rate of forty dollars for 
one dollar in specie. That the certificates of the Government consti- 
tuted the principal currency of the whole country, and passed from 
hand to hand at the rate of $40 for one in specie, and continued so 
during all the period of the old Confederacy. That the new Govern- 
ment could not in justice to the officers allow to strangers, who had 
taken them at their market value, any more or greater per cent, than 
the law had prescribed, viz : two and a half dollars to the hundred. 
The certificates sent for a captain's pay for twenty-four hundred dol- 
lars, was, in fact, by positive law, a certificate for only sixty dollars, 
just as much so as if a copy of the laws of March, April, or June, 
1780, had been attached to each certificate. 



17 

It can be no defence of the Government to assign as a reason for im- 
posing those certificates as payment to the officers, that the Govern- 
ment paid to other creditors in the same valueless certificates. Those 
certificates can be plead in satisfaction of the half-pay claim for only so 
much and no more than they were actually worth at the time they 
issued, aside from any of the inducements, by necessities or otherwise, 
of the officers. No individual can set up his own poverty, negligence, 
or wrong, as an excuse for the non-payment of his legal obligations ; 
much less can the Government, who is bound to protect its citizens 
against wrong and injustice. 

4. The petition of the small number of officers, being less than thirty, 
could not in any way impair the rights of the others who did not give 
their assent to it. 

5. That the resolve itself is utterly at variance with the spirit and 
object of the request even of those who signed it. They never intended 
to release a larger claim for a smaller one, and receive the same depre- 
ciated paper of the Government as money or security which they then 
held for the full amount. 

6. That the certificates issued by the Paymaster General, and sent 
to the officers, were utterly inconsistent with, and directly opposed to, 
the terms and conditions of the resolve itself, and therefore ought not 
to impair the rights of the officers under the resolve of 1780. 

7. By thus increasing the amount of this repudiated, depreciated 
paper, it caused the certificates which they then already held to be de- 
pressed in value still more, and thereby to have been a loss to the offi- 
cers, instead of any benefit ; and although the Government continued 
hopelessly insolvent, it would not permit the officers to send back these 
depreciated certificates, and confined that right to the invalid corps of 
officers. 

8. Congress resolved, as late as September 14, 1788, " That the 
f invalid officers be permitted to return the amount of their commuta- 
1 tion in other securities of the United States, where they have parted 
' with their own, provided the same shall be of the same amount and 
' bearing the same interest." Thus proving that those which issued 
to the officers were of no more value than any other of the Government 
securities after a period of five years. This law was unjust, in not ex- 
tending to all the officers the same privilege. 

9. That the rights of the officers ought not to be impaired by the 
reception or detention of those certificates which were sent to them by 
the Paymaster General, because they were also given for arrears of pay, 
and especially because they embraced the evidence of their service and 
the completion of their part of the contract. So far they were of some 
value to the officers ; but whether they had been secured and brought 
within the resolve, could not at that time have been known to the offi- 
cers ; they could only know that the resolve upon which they were 
founded required specie or security; and if by the implication of law 
the Government was entitled to a reasonable time to make that security, 
it was given. It was not in the power of the officers to have compelled 
the Government to have received them, if they had proposed to return 
them. The presumption is, that they were not permitted to return 

2 



18 

them, as those of the invalid corps were obliged to obtain a special law 
for that object. That their retention was not and could not have been 
any injury to the Government, inasmuch as their value was fixed by 
law at two dollars and fifty cents to the hundred. By this law, the cer- 
tificates to a captain were of the value of sixty dollars only. 

It will be seen by the Funding Act of August 4, 1790, that the new 
Government claimed the right of paying only about sixty per cent, of 
the amount of these certificates, by instalments, during a space of time 
of about forty years, in order, says the act, to conform " to the (then) 
present circumstances of the United States." 

FUNDING ACT OF AUGUST 4, 1790. 

The first section of the act reserves out of the proceeds of the reve- 
nue from customs, &c, $600,000 a year for the support of Government, 
and appropriates the residue for the payment of interest on debts and 
loans. The act then proceeds thus : 

" And as new loans are and will be necessary for the payment of the 

* aforesaid arrears of interest and the instalments of the principal of 
' said foreign debt, due and growing due, and may also be found expe- 

* dient in effecting an entire alteration in the state of the same." 

Wherefore, the second section authorizes the President to cause 
$12,000,000 to be borrowed, part to pay arrears and instalments of 
the foreign debt, and to make other contracts relating to the foreign 
debt. The act then proceeds in relation to the domestic debt thus : 

" And whereas it is desirable to adapt the nature of the provision to 
1 be made for the domestic debt to the present circumstances of the 
' United States, as far as it shall be found practicable, consistently with 
' good faith and the rights of the creditors, which can only be done by 
1 a voluntary loan on their part." 

The third section then authorizes a loan to be proposed to the full 
amount of the " domestic debt," by opening books for receiving sub- 
scriptions, by a commissioner of loans, to be appointed in each of the 
States ; and that the sums which shall be subscribed thereto be pay- 
able in " certificates," issued for the said debt according to their specie 
value; which said certificates are designated and described as follows : 

Description of certificates receivable for sums described. 

" 1. The ' certificates ' issued by the Register of the Treasury. 

" 2. Those issued by the Commissioners of Loans in the several States, 
' including ' certificates ' given pursuant to the act of Congress of the 
' 2d January, 1779, for bills of credit of the several emissions of the 
< 20th May, 1777, and of the 11th April, 1778. 

" 3. Those issued by the Commissioners for the adjustment of the 
' accounts of the quartermaster, commissary, hospital, clothing, and 
' marine departments. 

"4. Those issued by the Commissioners for the adjustment of ac- 
1 counts in the respective States. 

" 5. Those issued by the late and present Paymaster General, or 

* Commissioner of army accounts. 



19 

" 6. Those issued for the payment of interest, commonly called in- 
' dents of interest. 

" 7. And the ' bills of credit ' issued by the authority of the United 
' States in Congress assembled, at the rate of one hundred dollars in 
1 the said bills for one dollar in specie." 

The fourth section designates and describes the three new certificates 
which the subscribers to the said loans shall be entitled to receive — 
upon all certificates bearing interest the same is to be received up to 
the last day of December, 1790. 

That for the whole or any part of any sum subscribed to the said 
loan, by any person or persons, or body politic, which shall be paid in 
the principal of the said domestic debt, the subscriber or subscribers 
shall be entitled to a certificate, purporting that the United States owe 
to the holder or holders thereof, his, her, or their assigns, a sum to be 
expressed therein, equal to two-thirds of the sum so paid, bearing an 
interest of six per centum per annum, payable quarter yearly, and sub- 
ject to redemption by payments not exceeding in one year in amount of 
principal and interest the proportion of eight dollars upon a hundred of 
the sum mentioned in said certificate. A second certificate for one- 
third, payable as aforesaid, bearing interest after 1800. A third cer- 
tificate for the amount of the interest, bearing an interest at three per 
centum per annum, payable quarter yearly ; provided it shall not be 
understood that the United States shall be bound or obliged to redeem 
in the proportion aforesaid ; but it shall be understood only that they 
have a right to do so. 

Thus, after this second proposition made to the officers had remained 
entirely unprovided for during eight years, and no portion of the prin- 
cipal or interest, which was payable annually, had been paid, these 
certificates were finally scaled again, and given up, by a subscription 
to a loan for the funding of the domestic debt, at the rate of one hun- 
dred dollars for one, and a new proposition was made for the issuing 
of new certificates to the holders, (as few of them were in the hands of 
the officers at that time,) payable by annual instalments of eight dol- 
lars to the hundred, making a deduction of interest nearly equal to the 
principal. In this last proposition, Congress was more cautious, and 
reserved the right of paying this proportion of the debt or not. 

Therefore the claimants urge that, inasmuch as the records and acts 
of Congress show that none of the terms and conditions of the resolve 
of March 22, 1783 were ever complied with, but repudiated, and the 
certificates scaled by the new Government, it is not necessary to inquire 
whether the officers ever assented to the same or not ; that the reception 
and detention of those certificates did not affect or in any way impair 
the rights of the officers under the original contract. 

The only question remaining for the consideration of Congress would 
appear to be, what amount, if anything, ought the claimants to allow to 
the Government for those repudiated and depreciated certificates 1 The 
laws of March, April, and June, of 1780, established their value to be 
two and a half dollars to the hundred. Seven years afterward, they 
were funded at one hundred for one. In order, however, to relieve these 



20 

claims from any misapprehension, the claimants do not ask for the 
redemption of those certificates, nor the losses they sustained on the 
money of the Government for arrears of pay and supplies furnished — 
all these amounting to much more than their claim for half pay, which 
are all suspended. As it would be impossible, in the attempt to redeem 
the public money, to do justice to the original payees, while the public 
currency was one hundred for one, the merchant received it and passed 
it at that rate, and could not lose on the transaction. 

But the claimants say, the contract for half pay was made with the 
Government after it had utterly failed, and after it had long been una- 
ble to meet its engagements ; after its most sacred debts had been scaled 
by the Government, and after a permanent law had made the certifi- 
cates of the Government the currency of the country at two dollars 
and fifty cents to the hundred. It was at this dark time in the history 
of the Government, when the contract of 1780 was made with the offi- 
cers. They did not expect any pay for many years ; they looked to 
the result of the experiment of a republican form of government ; they 
staked their services, and all the money, provisions, and clothing, they 
could raise, to sustain and keep on the field the soldiers of their respect- 
ive corps ; they looked to the honor of the country even for their half 
pay. This contract was viewed to be entitled to a higher consideration 
of the Government to those of any other claims whatever. It really 
was, as the resolve of March 22, 1783 declared them to have been, an 
obligation " for which the faith of the nation hath been pledged " — 
presenting a just distinction over all the claims, which runs through all 
the subsequent acts of Congress. Therefore, a payment of two and a 
half dollars on the hundred could not be an accord and satisfaction for 
a hundred dollars. Payment of sixty dollars in this paper was not a 
payment of $2,400 — that being the value of captain's certificate by law. 
The contract was founded upon past services, as well as those rendered 
subsequently. Fortunes of the officers were given to the country ; their 
children deprived of an education, as well as their inheritance. The 
patience with which the officers submitted to all the delay on the part 
of the Government, in the omission and inability to respond to this 
solemn obligation, and especially the readiness with which they again 
entered the service of the army, makes still more brilliant every page 
of their history, and renders their memory still more dear to every 
American heart. Many of the survivors were on every battle field 
during all the subsequent wars ; a large number of them were killed 
at that destructive battle under General St. Clair at the sources of the 
Maumee, on the 6th November, 1792, where of our army 682 were killed, 
and 264 were wounded, at that single battle. They not only gave more 
than seven years' service to establish this Government, but many of 
them afterwards gave their lives in its defence and support. Why 
then, it may be asked, if these claims embraced such important consid- 
erations, have they been suffered to remain so long unpaid? 

There have been many circumstances attending the progress of the 
Government which have contributed to this result. A war threatened 
with France in 1793 ; the entire inability of the Government to pay its 
debts up to 1800 ; after that time came the non-intercourse act, which 



21 

destroyed our commerce ; then came the war with England, which con- 
tinued from 1812 to 1815, creating a very heavy additional indebted- 
ness of the Government. The war of 1812 brought into the field a new 
and large number of claimants. These, added to a vast number of 
older claims, were sufficient to deter Congress, and almost to defy invest- 
igation, and rendered applications of claimants, with any prospect of a 
decision, a most forlorn hope. All of the committees of Congress have 
united in reporting that nothing which was done under the resolve of 
1783 impaired the rights of those officers to half pay under the resolve 
of October 21, 1780. In 1810, 1818, 1819, 1826, 1828, and 1838, 
reports were made recommending their payment ; but no general pro- 
vision was made on behalf of those claims until the passage of the act 
of May 15, 1828 : 

** AN ACT for the relief of certain surviving officers and soldiers of the Army of the 

Revolution. 

" Sec. 1. Be it enacted, fyc, That each of the surviving officers of 
the army of the Revolution, in the continental line, who was entitled 
to half pay by the resolve of October twenty-first, seventeen hundred 
and eighty, be authorized to receive, out of any money in the Treasury 
not otherwise appropriated, the amount of his full pay in said line, 
according to his rank in the line, to begin on the third of March, one 
thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, and to continue during his 
natural life : Provided, That, under this act, no officer shall be enti- 
tled to receive a larger sum than the full pay of a captain in said line. 

" Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That, whenever any of said 
officers has received money of the United States, as a pensioner, since 
the third day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, 
aforesaid, the sum so received shall be deducted from what said offi- 
cer would otherwise be entitled to under the first section of this act ; 
and every pension to which said officer is now entitled shall cease after 
the passage of this act. 

" Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That every surviving non- 
commissioned officer, musician, or private, in said army, who enlisted 
therein for and during the war, and continued in service until its ter- 
mination, and thereby became entitled to receive a reward of eighty 
dollars, under a resolve of Congress passed May fifteenth, seventeen 
hundred and eighty-eight, shall be entitled to receive his full monthly 
pay in said service, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated ; to begin on the third day of March, one thousand eight 
hundred and twenty-six, and to continue during his natural life : 
Provided, That no non-commissioned officer, musician, or private, in 
said army, who is now on the pension list of the United States, shall 
be entitled to the benefits of this act. 

" Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the pay allowed by this 
act shall, under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, be paid 
to the officer or soldier entitled thereto, or to their authorized attor- 
ney, at such places and days as said Secretary may direct ; and that 
no foreign officer shall be entitled to said pay, nor shall any officer or 
soldier receive the same, until he furnish to said Secretary satisfac- 



22 

tory evidence that he is entitled to the same in conformity to the pro- 
visions of this act ; and pay allowed by this act shall not in any way 
be transferable, or liable to attachment, levy, or seizure, by any legal 
process whatever, but shall inure wholly to the personal benefit of the 
officer or soldier entitled to the same by this act. 
" Sec. 5. Jind be it further enacted, That so much of said pay as 
accrued by the provisions of this act before the third day of March, 
eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, shall be paid to the officers and 
soldiers entitled to the same, as soon as may be, in the manner and 
under the provisions before mentioned ; and the pay which shall accrue 
after said day shall be paid semi-annually, in like manner, and under 
the same provisions." [Approved May 15, 1828.] 

Attorney General Butler, in a very able and very elaborate opinion 
of February 3, 1834, shows very conclusively that the act of 1828 was 
to be regarded as an acknowledgment of a debt equitably due, than as 
conferring gratuitous pensions. 

By this act, the claimants, or those who had survived, were acknowl- 
edged as creditors of the Government ', and the second section declares, 
that any pension to which said officer was entitled was to cease after 
the passage of this act. 

It will be seen that the act allows full pay to all the officers, not to 
exceed that of captain, during life, and also extends back to March 3 7 
1826. While it admits the efficacy of the contract of 1780, by allow- 
ing full pay instead of half pay, and also extending back over two years, 
(equal to four years of half pay,) at the same time, in honor to that 
Congress, it imposes no condition that such payment shall be in full for 
said contract ; and the words of this act make the sum payable only 
to such as " was entitled to half pay by the resolve of October 21, 1780." 
The presumption is, that it was designed, by full pay instead of half 
pay, gradually to extinguish the claim. More especially are we led to 
this conclusion, from the fact, that the committees of Congress have 
recommended their annual pay for the future, and the issues of Gov- 
ernment scrip for the past. 

This view is further confirmed by the act of Congress of the 2d of 
March, 1853, which expressly declares that any applicant " for a pen- 
sion, under the act of 7th" January, 1832, in pursuance of contracts 
with the Government, made previous to the 11th day of April, 1783, 
and continued in service until after that, it shall be the duty of the 
Secretary of War to compute the period of any such service from the 
time he entered the army until the date of the definitive treaty of 
peace, and to allow him a pension accordingly." This is an act and 
a legislative construction, which was made subsequent to either that of 
1828 or 1832 — each of which recognises the contract of 1780, and 
neither asks for any deduction for the commutation certificates, or 
■otherwise. The act of 1828 was evidently intended to restore the sur- 
vivors of those officers to their original rights, and to become a 
.gradual draft on the treasury for so much of their claim, leaving to the 
future action of Congress to provide, as had been recommended by 
many of ■the committees, for the arreras. If, however, any doubt 



23 

could remain of the correctness of this exposition, the)' all disappear, 
and the principle is established beyond all question, in the passage of 
the many subsequent acts of Congress to that of 1828, all of which 
were in behalf of the same officers who had already received up to that 
time equal to fourteen years of half pay, by seven years full pay, under 
the act of 1828, in the name of Alexander Garden, Caleb Starke, 
Mountjoy Bailey, James Bennett, Edward Brooke, Thomas Triplett, 
James Gibbon, Ephraim Whiteacher, Isaac Lay, and many others, by 
several acts. Each received the full amount of five years commutation 
full pay in specie, with interest. Having admitted the claim, and 
restored them to the position of payees and creditors of the Govern- 
ment, it made no difference whether it was received as commutation or 
otherwise. 

In further confirmation of this view for half pay, reference may be 
had to the action of Congress in behalf of the officers of the State line 
of Virginia. The promises of half pay by Virginia to her State line are 
in the same words as those of the United States to the Continental line. 

The United States assumed the payment of those military claims for 
which Virginia was liable, but not otherwise. 

The act of Congress of July 5, 1832, provided for the settlement and 
payment of the same. The Secretary of the Treasury of the United 
States paid the principal and interest upon each year's half pay, as the 
same became due, on all those claims which were unsettled, as well as 
those on which judgments had been rendered against Virginia by her 
own courts — thus giving another legislative construction and declaration 
of the extent of the half-pay claims of the United States, as well as 
those of Virginia. 

Congress has often recognised the claim in the name of the heirs of 
the deceased officer, and paid the full amount, with interest, to them, 
in the form of commutation, after the father had received full pay for 
many years, under the act of 1828. James Withers, after receiving 
twelve years full pay under this act, then received the full amount of 
his commutation of five years half pay. 

The claimants say that the act of 1828, and the passage of numer- 
ous special acts of Congress in behalf of a large number of individual 
ofiicers of the same class of creditors, are a legislative construction and 
declaration, and sufficient admission in behalf of all the other claimants 
under the same contract, and binding upon Congress, according to the 
decisions of the Supreme Court and Secretaries of War. 

The act of 1828, and the many subsequent special acts of Congress, 
being subsequent to any of the acts of limitations, established the claim 
of the heirs of the deceased officer, as much as it secured it to those 
who survived. 

If, however, there could have been any doubt remaining in relation 
to the legality and equity of those claims, the more recent decision of 
the Court of Claims, confirmed by the passage of an act for payment 
of the half pay for life, together with the interest, would seem to settle 
the question beyond all controversy. It being the judicial and legisla- 
tive construction and declaration of the law-making and law-expound- 
ing power, should be considered as binding on all parties. 



24 

THOMAS H. BAIRD vs. THE UNITED STATES. 

The case referred to is that of Thomas H. Baird, as a son of Absa- 
lom Baird, who was a commissioned surgeon in the army of the Revo- 
lution, and in that capacity was entitled by law to half pay for life 
and other emoluments. 

" The proceedings (says Chief Justice Gilchrist) in relation to the 
claim for commutation do not appear to be very material in relation to 
the case in the present position. On the 23d March, 1783, a resolu- 
tion was passed, providing that the officers and others entitled to half 
pay for life ' shall be entitled to receive at the end of the war their five 
years full pay, in lieu of half pay for life, in money — that is, specie — 
or in securities on interest, as Congress shall find most convenient.' 
On the 28th of January, 1794, Dr. Baird applied for the benefit of 
this provision, but died in the year 1806 — having, as is said in the 
report of the Committee of Claims of the 5th February, 1855, ' be- 
come wearied and disheartened with delay.' In the year 1818, his 
son, Thomas H. Baird, having become of age, petitioned Congress 
for relief; and on the 3d of March, 1855, the committee reported 
that ' Dr. Absalom Baird was entitled to the benefit of the act of the 
17th of January, 1781, extending the grant of half pay for life to the 
officers of the hospital department and medical staff.' No action was 
had upon the resolution until the 22d of June, 1836, when an act 
was passed, granting five years full pay as commutation, under the 
resolution of 1783, but without interest.'''' 

" Now, this claim does not depend for its validity upon any admission 
contained in the act of 1836. But the Congress which passed that act 
must have considered that Dr. Baird had a legal claim of some 
kind, otherwise their conduct in granting him five years full pay was 
wholly indefensible. It is, however, relied upon as a final settlement 
of the claim. Upon any principle known to the law, this position is 
wholly untenable. It is easy enough to declare, ex cathedra, that it 
was a final settlement. But it is extremely difficult to imagine, in 
the absence of all evidence, what reasons can be urged for holding 
that the payment of a sum of money is of itself a discharge of a debt 
for a larger amount. A plea of payment of a small sum in satisfac- 
tion of a larger is bad, even after verdict. (2 Parsons on Contracts, 
130, and notes.) This principle is familiar to every lawyer. A debt 
may be paid by a fair and well-understood compromise, carried faith- 
fully into effect. But here there was no compromise. If it were a 
case between individuals, no one would dream of applying such a term 
to it. The United States are either bound by principles of law ap- 
plicable to them, or they are not so bound. If they are not bound, 
there is an end of the discussion, for then all reasoning is fruitless. 
If they are bound by the principles of law, it is impossible to regard 
the payment of five years full pay, without interest, as a satisfaction 
of this claim. There is no evidence that either party so regarded it ; 
and unless we set at defiance every principle of law, we cannot hold 
that one party to a contract, without the consent of the other, can dis- 
charge his debt by the payment of a smaller sum than the amount 



25 

due." " The amount of Dr. Baird's half pay was two hundred 
and forty dollars per annum, payable at the end of every year. He 
was entitled to this sum up to the 27th day of October, 1805, the day 
of his death, and interest on the payments as they became due, ac- 
cording to the express provisions of the resolutions of June 3, 1784." 
The Court of Claims therefore reported a bill for the relief of Thomas 
H. Baird. 

" Be it enacted, fyc, That the Secretary of the Treasury be and 
hereby is directed, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated, to pay to Thomas H. Baird, administrator of the estate 
of Absalom Baird, a commissioned surgeon in the army of the Revo- 
lution, the sum of ten thousand and seventy-four dollars and eighty- 
four cents, with interest thereon from the 27th day of October, 1805, 
to the 1st day of June, 1856, deducting therefrom the sum of twenty- 
four hundred dollars, paid under the act of June 23, 1836." 
This bill, as presented by the Court of Claims, was reported, and 
passed both Houses by large majorities, without amendment. The act 
was duly approved, and the amount paid at the Treasury. 

This case embraced all the principles which are involved in all of the 
same class of claims, and, by all the rules of justice which are known 
to the highest judicial tribunals, must be applicable, and is a judicial 
and legislative construction and declaration of the rights of all the other 
claimants, founded upon the same contract, and governed by the same 
rules of evidence. Here is the decision of an able court of the Govern- 
ment in behalf of the half-pay claims, and this decision has been con- 
firmed by a solemn act of the 34th Congress. This decision and act 
of Congress is one of " the laws of the United States, made in pursuance 
of the Constitution, under the authority of the United States," which 
is declared by that Constitution " shall be the supreme law of the land ; " 
and the suspension of the acts of limitation of the land also extends to 
the half-pay portion of the contract of October 21, 1780. 

In addition to this case and those before referred to, are the many 
laws of Congress in behalf of those officers in the grants of land; for 
it will be remembered that the contract to the officers who served to the 
end of the war embraced not only the promise of money to the amount 
of half of their annual pay, but also grants of land, which was equally 
binding on the Government and connected with the payment of money, 
in the same manner as the bond of one individual to another, for the 
payment of one hundred dollars in money, and to convey him one hun- 
dred acres of land, the tender or payment of the one would not be a 
discharge of the other condition ; any act of limitation in relation to the 
one, or renewal of the promise of the one, would equally affect the other. 
If, then, the treasury was empty, and the Government could not pay 
the money portion of the contract, having large tracts of land, it be- 
comes interesting to know how far the Government has complied with 
this portion of the contract ; for it is a well-settled principle of law, 
that where no time is named for the conveyance of land, the law will 
give the party only a reasonable time to make the conveyance. 

The delay on the part of the Government must in this particular 
strike every one with surprise. 



26 

The ordinance of Congress for ascertaining the mode of disposing of 
the public lands in the Western territory ; the resolve of May 20, 1785, 
refers to the promises of land by the resolves of September 16, 1776, 
12th August, 1780, 30th September, 1780, and ordained that the Sec- 
retary of War ascertain who are the objects of said resolutions and en- 
gagements, and the quantity of land to which such person or their 
representatives are respectively entitled; and to cause townships, &c, 
in such manner as shall be deemed impartial distribution, &c. 

A supplementary ordinance of Congress of July 9, 1788, by which 
it was further ordained that the Secretary of War issue warrants for 
bounties of land to the several officers and soldiers who may be entitled, 
&c, their respective assigns, or their legal representatives, certifying 
therein the rank or station of each officer, and the line, regiment, corps, 
and company, in which the officer or soldier served. 

But, strange as it may seem, prior to the act of Congress of the first 
day of March, 1800, no locations of military land warrants granted by 
the United States could be made, unless such location embraced an 
entire quarter township of four thousand acres ; consequently, no officer 
or soldier .of the continental army could effect a location of the quantity 
of land embraced by the warrant he received for his services, unless he 
united with other officers and soldiers, or the holders of such warrants. 
These evils continued until the act of March 1, 1800. 

What appears still more strange is, that the Government, after 
having taken seventeen years before being ready to deliver to each offi- 
cer his separate portion of land, gave to the claimants only from the 
16th of March, 1800, to the 1st day of January, 1802, in which to 
apply for their warrant ; establishing a ratio between power and right 
of seventeen to two. 

Subsequently, however, to the limitation fixed by the act of 1802, 
Congress, by successive acts, passed at intervals from two to five years, 
continued to authorize the issuing of military land warrants to the 
officers and soldiers of the Continental lines, whose claims for bounty 
land remained unsatisfied — the last of which acts of extension was 
passed February 8, 1854, which extended the time for discharging this 
portion of the contract, up to the 26th of June, 1858. 

The claimants therefore urge, that the half pay was only an enlarge- 
ment of the money portion of the contract, in " addition " to the land. 
By the act of October 3, 1780, the land is declared to be in " addition" 
to the seven years half pay in specie or current money; that the two 
considerations were blended in one and the same entire contract ; that 
the many laws of Congress, on the suspension of acts of limitation, the 
renewal, acknowledgment, promise, or extension of time of one portion 
of the contract, applies with equal force to all the others, including the 
half pay as well as the land. If this position be correct, the whole and 
entire contract is carried forward to the 26th of June, 1858. 

The promise of the land was also a vested right, and could not be 
abrogated or impaired by any subsequent legislation. 

They further urge, that in all cases between individuals, an acknowl- 
edgment and promise to pay to one of ever so many joint and several 
payees to a note or contract, is an acknowledgment, renewal, and 



27 

promise to pay, to each and all the other payees their proportion, and 
will take the claim out of the statute of limitations ; that the general 
act of May 15, 1828, took all the claims out of the statute of limita- 
tions. 

It is admitted the resolves of October 21, 1780, October 3, 1780, 
September 16, 1776, constituted a solemn contract between the Gov- 
ernment and the several officers, for land and half pay due to each and 
all of them (the act of October 3, 1780, declares the land to be " in 
addition" to the half pay) whose claim was once brought within the 
resolve, by having perfected the evidence of service, and thereby con- 
summated the contract. This was done, in most of the cases, by the 
ordinances of May 20, 1785, and July 9, 1788, where the Secretary of 
War was to determine who are entitled to land, " certifying therein 
the rank or station of each officer, and the line, regiment, corps, and 
company, in which the officer and soldier served." The evidence of 
service would also appear in the record of the commutation certificates. 
In the absence of the record of the evidence of service, as prescribed 
for the land portion of the consideration, and also the record of the 
commutation certificates, the Court of Claims, it would seem, decided, 
in the case of E. B. Chamberlain and others vs. the United States, 
hereto annexed, that it came within and was barred by the statute of 
limitations of November 2, 1785, July 23, 1787, and February 12, 
1793 ; also, administrator of Armabel Chandolet vs. the United States; 
also, administrator of Louis Marnay vs. the United States. 

Joseph Stohely et al. vs. the United States; Jeremiah M. Williams 
vs. the same. The Court, it would seem, did not consider in this case 
the important connection of the land and the money portions of the 
contract for half pay, as the several considerations are blended, and 
constitute one entire contract. 

The act of October 3, 1780, expressly declares, that from the time 
the reform of the army takes place, they be entitled to half pay for 
seven years, in specie, or current money equivalent, and also grants of 
land at the close of the war, agreeably to the resolution of September 
16, 1776 ; and the act of September 18, 1776, provides for the grants of 
land, "in addition " to money bounty of twenty dollars. 

But the court say that " if Joshua Chamberlain was a captain in the 
' Revolutionary war, as alleged in the petition, the same evidence 
1 which would be sufficient to substantiate the claim for half pay for 
i life, would establish also the right to the bounty land." 

The evidence and record of the one would be the evidence and record 
of the other. There could have been no other presentation of the 
claim of an officer to half pay during life, which could have been of any 
binding force, other than the return and record that the officer claiming 
had served to the end of the war, and was in service on the 21st of 
October, 1780. The extent of the claim depended entirely upon the 
duration of life. If he was bound to file his claim for one year's 
annuity, he would have been equally bound to have filed it every year. 
These claims for half pay for life were a vested right, and, by their 
very nature, could not come within any of the statutes of limitation. 
Jf they existed, they existed by virtue of a commission, duly recorded ; 



28 

and if they were brought within the act of October 21, 1780, and were 
entitled to half pay, their claim was already recorded. In the absence 
of that presentation and record of service, they could not claim their 
land and half pay; and the Court of Claims, it would seem, has so 
decided. 

But it may well be urged, inasmuch as the United States, by their 
judiciary act, expressly excludes all individuals from instituting any 
suit against the Government, thereby deprived itself of the right there- 
after of passing any acts of limitation for the presentation of claims 
due from the Government to any of its creditors. That the acts of 
February 2, 1785, and July 23, 1787, were only designed to enable 
Congress to adjust the claims which existed between the several States 
and the General Government, and were virtually repealed by the ninth 
section of the funding act of August 4, 1790 ; and the act of February 
3, 1793, was only designed to induce the perfection of the evidence of 
claims which were contracted previous to that time, and not to affect 
the record evidence of the Government in behalf of any claims of its 
citizens, no more than it could annul or impair the record of the Gov- 
ernment against the debtors of the United States. The Government 
could not, by any principles of law, repudiate all claims against it for 
many years, and then set up its own acts of limitations against their 
payment. The Government of the United States having established a 
Court " to hear and determine all claims founded upon any law of Con- 
1 gress, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Govern- 
' ment of the United States," and virtually by this act itself admits 
the parties, for the first time by a public law, to their rights lis credit- 
ors, and have thereby waived all acts of limitation to all claims where 
they are debtors, the Court is not authorized to consider any vested 
rights as barred by any act of limitation. 

It will be remembered that the statutes of limitations were urged in 
discussing the report of the committee of the Senate of the United 
States, for the act of May 15, 1828, when these claims were fully 
considered, and advocated on strict common-law principles as well as 
equity ; and the acts of limitation were by implication repealed, so far 
as regarded these claims, as will be seen by this short extract from the 
closing remarks of the chairman of that committee, Judge Woodbury, 
and also of Mr. Tucker, by which it will be seen the amount excluded 
by the funding act, and the loss to the officer, and the objections to 
commutation, as assigned by a Mr. Jackson, an attorney before the 
Court of Claims. 

Extract from the closing remarks of Judge Woodbury, Annals of 
Congress, Vol. 4, part 1, for 1827-'8, page 441-'2. 

" Mr. Woodbury said: But very far was it from the intention of 
1 himself, or his able friend from Georgia, (Mr. Berrien,) in advocating 
' the claim on strict common-law principles, to admit that it could not 
' be supported also on principles the most liberal and equitable; while 
c it was equally far, as he believed, from the views of the other mem- 
' bers of the committee, (Mr. Van Buren and Mr. Harrison,) who had 



29 

so eloquently pressed the mere equity of the claim, to admit that it 
was not also well based on strict common-law principles." * * * 

" But they have averred, and it is again repeated, that these officers 
are seeking a right, and that is a right both on common-law and on 
chancery principles. But if on only one, whether it be a right on 
strict common-law principles, or on chancery principles, it is equally 
a right, and the claim is equally a legal claim. The forum in which 
it becomes a right does not alter its legality. Hence, if every gentle- 
man would agree with him from Virginia, (Mr. Tyler,) that the 
statute of limitation should be scorned, and that the pretended pay- 
ments made to these officers was 'mere wind, mere trash,' I aver, 
that in any forum, before any court or jury in Christendom, this right, 
as between individuals, could now be unanswerably established. Let 
the issue be formed and the cause tried to-morrow, and no three or 
five judges, no twelve ' good men and true,' as jurors, could say that 
the wages of toil and blood, the solemn promises for sacrifices and 
sufferings, to secure the liberties of America, had ever been discharged 
by only ' wind and trash.' " 

* * * « Without dwelling a moment on considerations before 
urged in the argument, in favor of the legality of this claim, let me 
ask, what has been the reply to the position of the committee, that, 
on strict legal principles the promise of half pay for life has ever 
been fulfilled 1 Has any one shown that the half pay, in the form of 
half pay, has ever been paid 1 ? No pretence for it. Has any one 
shown that the half pay has ever been technically released 1 No 
pretence for it." * * * 

" How, then, has the promise of October, 1780, been fulfilled 1 In no 
way, except by the act of commutation. But it could not be fulfilled 
by that act, unless all things were transacted in conformity to the pro- 
visions of that act. Yet none can deny that, in conformity to these 
provisions, the commutation must have been accepted by majorities in 
each of the lines. Such is the express, unequivocal language of the act. 
Whereas, all must admit, it now appears never to have been accepted 
by even majorities in over nine linos of the army. Again, to conform 
to the act, the acceptance must have been in six months, when no 
acceptance by a single line appears to have taken place till some time 
after six months. Everybody feels and knows, likewise, that the pay- 
ment, to be in conformity to the act, was to have been money, or at 
least securities equivalent to money, when, in truth, it was neither; 
and even under the most favorable view, if the certificates were kept 
till the funding, fell short of what was due, from one-fourth to one- 
third. So the certificates, or the payment, should have been made in 
September, 1783, but were not, in fact, made until some time in 
1784— '5, when worth much less. But, break through the forms of 
measures, and every lawyer, every constitutional statesman, must 
admit that, on strict legal principles, there should not only have been 
a conformity to the commutation act, but, in the act itself, to make it 
binding, there should have been a regard to private vested rights." 

I propose to submit one other extract from the same book, which 
shows how the second agreement of the Government was executed. 



30 

The records in the Register's office will show that Mr. Tucker is right 
in his figures, and as to the principle of settling or redeeming these 
certificates under the funding act : 

" Mr. Tucker, of N. J. It is ascertained, Mr. Chairman, that each 
captain, for his five years full pay, received a certificate for $2,400, 
hearing interest at six per cent., payable annually, and such a cer- 
tificate Captain Dehart received in lieu of his half pay for life, which 
ran eight years without payment of interest, as before stated, viz : from 
the 1st of January, 1783, to the 1st of January, 1791, the interest 
amounting on the latter day to $1,152; making in the aggregate 
$3,552. It will be recollected that in March, 1788, the present 
Government went into operation, and in the year 1790 made provision 
for and funded the public debt. 

" Well, sir, how did they provide for the payment of Captain De- 
hart's $2,400 principal, and $1,152 interest, due on the 1st of Jan- 
uary, 1791? Why, sir, they gave him three certificates. One for 
$1,600, being two-thirds his principal, with intei'est at six per cent., 
and one for $800, the other third of his debt, but deferred ten years 
without interest, and, instead of paying his $1,152 down, or giving 
him paper at six per cent., they gave him a certificate for his $1,152 
interest, redeemable at the pleasure of the United States, at three 
per cent. Let us now examine how this funding system operated. 

'1. Loss of interest on $800, deferred from 1st January, 
1791, to 1st January, 1801, (ten years,) at six per cent. - $480.00 

' 2. Interest on the above sum from the 1st January, 1801, 
to the 1st January, 1828, (twenty-seven years,) at six per 
cent. ----------------- 777.60 

' 3. Loss of interest on the $1,152 of the three per cent., 
from 1st January, 1791, to 1st January, 1828, (thirty-seven 
years,) at three per cent. ----------- 1,278.72 

" Total loss on Captain Dehart's, down to this time - - 2,536.32 

" And, in the same proportion, every officer's pay or commutation, 
according to his rank. (lb., p. 2,599.) 

" The commutation, then, is clearly liable to the following objections: 

" 1. That the commutation was not a valid accord and satisfaction 
for half pay for life. 

" 2. That it was so construed as to take away the rights of these 
officers, under the resolve of October, 1780. 

" 3. Of not being an equivalent for the half pay. 

" 4. Of having been effected under circumstances, and by the opera- 
tion of motives, which deprive it of all obligatory force. 

" 5. That according to strict legal construction, these officers did not 
commute their promised half pay for life by accepting the so-called 
commutation certificates ; they in no respect having been in conformity 
to the act. 

" 6. Of partial and defective execution." 



31 

SOME OF THE OBJECTIONS URGFD IN CONGRESS AGAINST THE BILL NOW 
BEFORE THE SENATE, AS REPORTED BY SENATOR EVANS. 

Because this report (which was made February 4, 1854) admitted 
" the legal obligation, in most of the cases, had been discharged by the 
payment of commutation." And although the report professes to admit 
the claimants to their original rights, yet the report adds, that the 
allowance of those claims is more in nature of a " benevolence, given in 
discharge of a great moral obligation;" and therefore it is contended 
that Congress could not constitutionally appropriate money for benevo- 
lent purposes. Yet, in another portion of this report, it is said : " The 
' committee are of the opinion they should be admitted to their original 
' rights, and have accordingly provided in the bill that they shall be 
* paid the half pay for life, deducting the amount of their commutation 
' certificates. No interest to be allowed." 

This report of Senator Evans was made 4th February, 1854. Since 
that time, however, while the present bill was under discussion, and call- 
ing forth some of the ablest minds in opposition, one of the same class 
of claims was undergoing a legal investigation in the Court of Claims. 
That court decided that these claims were founded upon a solemn con- 
tract — that their half pay was a vested right — and could not be rescinded 
or impaired by any subsequent legislation; and that the commutation, 
although paid in specie, without interest, was the compromise for the 
half pay, and allowe'd the claimant the full amount of half pay, together 
with the interest on each year. The report of the court was made to 
the 84th Congress, while this bill was pending in the Senate, and this 
report passed both Houses by a large majoritjr, which would seem to 
have settled the question of the claims being founded upon a legal 
consideration. 

The question now before the Senate would seem to be, not whether 
Congress made on the 21st October, 1780, a judicious contract or not, 
but whether, having adopted the report of the court, and thereby admit- 
ted these parties to their original contract, by a positive law, in pursu- 
ance of the Constitution — whether Congress, with honor to itself, can 
repudiate the deliberate action of the 34th Congress. 

The objection which excited much opposition to the present bill, viz : 
That those officers who lived long " enough, and received their commu- 
' tation, and also those who received full pay for many years under the 
1 act of May 15, 1828, would still receive the same amount, and much 
1 more than those who died early." This at first view would seem to 
have some weight, but upon further consideration will be found to be 
quite the reverse, when taken in connection with the principles of this 
decision. 

The extent of the claim depended entirely upon the duration of life. 
Therefore, if all the officers are legally and equitably entitled to prin- 
cipal and interest, and by the principles of law, well established, all pay- 
ments made on a contract pa) r able with interest are first to be applied 
toward the interest, those officers who lived the longest, and to whom 
therefore the largest amount was due, on the suspension of interest, 
must lose more than those who died early; and the person whose claim, 
in consequence of his early death, was the least, would lose the least ; 



32 

whicli objection makes more apparent the injustice committed to the 
officers by the act of 1783. 

Some objected to the bill, because it embraced only those officers 
named in the resolves, and did not extend to the soldiers of the army, 
although they were not embraced in the resolves, who held certificates 
to the amount of eighty dollars each. Yet it will be seen that each of 
the surviving soldiers received, under the act of May 15, 1828, over 
two hundred dollars in specie, and full pay during the remainder of life, 
although they were not entitled to half pay by the resolve of 1780. 

Others objected to the original contract, because some of the officers 
who served a shorter time would receive the same amount as those who 
served the longest term under the resolve of October 21, 1780. The 
act of 1780 only embraced those who were then in service, and contin- 
ued during the war, and allowed those officers to be supernumeraries 
who retired, to whom had been promised seven years half pay in specie 
or current money, or an equivalent, payable on the first day of Janu- 
ar}^, 1781. There were but few who retired. In looking over twelve 
regiments of Virginia, I observe but five whose commissions were sub- 
sequent to 1778 — averaging from 1775 to 1778. 

The old Confederacy repudiated, during all the period of its existence, 
the payment of even the interest of those certificates, which it should 
be remembered was payable at the end of each year, which was in express 
violation of the terms of the certificates, and also the conditions of the 
resolve itself of 1783. The ninth section of the funding act provides, 
" That nothing in this act contained shall be construed in any w r ise to 
' alter, abridge, or impair, the rights of those creditors of the United 
' States who shall not subscribe to the said loan, or the contracts upon 
c which their respective claims are founded, but the contracts and rights 
' shall remain in full force and virtue." 

The funding act made no distinction between the certificates which 
were virtually discharged or scaled by the acts of jthe 18th March, 18th 
April, and 28th June, 1780 ; and those certificates which were sent to 
the officers, any person who had taken them at the price fixed by law, 
or at a still lower rate — at one hundred for one — received the same as 
those which represented the pledged faith of the nation for an estate of 
half pay for life ; which is an admission by the Government of the entire 
absence of all security, and therefore the repudiation of the resolve of 
1783. The claims of the officers to half pay were by the express words 
of the ninth section of the act of August 4, 1790, not in any way altered, 
abridged, or impaired ; but the contract was thereby designedly left in 
full force, or, as the act declares, " shall remain in full force and virtue." 
The officers did not subscribe to the loan, nor did they ever authorize 
any person to subscribe for them ; but if any of them had subscribed 
to the loan, the original contract upon which they were founded was 
not thereby altered, abridged, or impaired, because the funding act 
expressly provided that the United States were not bound to pay even 
that proportion of the claim, but simply reserved the right of doing so. 
It could not have been expected that the officers should have waited 
forty years to test this provision of the funding act. The Government 
therefore could not have suspended only the value of the certificates at 



oo 



the time they were issued, which would haye been to a captain sixty 
dollars, and no more. If the Government redeemed at a greater per 
cent., it was to accommodate speculators, and in violation of the rights 
of the officers and duty of Congress. 

In confirmation of this construction of the contract of October 21, 
1780, it will be remembered that the seven years half pay promised 
under the resolve of October 3, 1780, was evidently made with reference 
to the depreciated state of all public paper, and was expressly made 
payable in specie, or an equivalent, and the contract of October, 21, 
1780, being only an extension, and also embracing this promise of 
seven years half pay, is conclusive evidence that the half pay for life 
was to have been held sacred, and could not by any rules of justice 
come within the principles of the funding law, and subject to the same 
rules which applied to all the depreciated paper held by purchasers, at 
the rate of one dollar to the hundred. 

It cannot be urged by the Government, that if the certificates were 
of little value, so must have been the half-pay contract. One which 
was classed with the floating, valueless paper, constituting the cur- 
rency of the country, should not be classed with specie, secured by the 
honor and all the property of the Government. 

The half pay was virtually secured by the pledge of the public faith 
for its payment, presenting at the time the contract was made a wide 
distinction between the valueless paper of the Government which the 
officers then held, which was known to be worth at that time, by the law 
of the land, only the rate of forty dollars for one. 

It is said, the officers did not remonstrate to Congress against the 
injustice and inequality of the act of 1783. It is said, in answer, that 
the petition of the few officers asked to have paid in advance to them 
(not a new promise) an equivalent to their half pay for life. What would 
have been an equivalent to the officer of eighty years, could not have 
been an equivalent for the half pay for life of the officer of thirty-seven 
years of age. 

But the officers say, that the resolve of 1783 ought to have no effect, 
because it was well known to Congress that the Government had no 
power to comply with its terms, even if the officers had assented to it. 

It ought not to be forgotten, in connection with the contract for half 
pay for life, that the Government was driven from one expedient to an- 
other, which the imperative necessities of the moment required : 

1. Promising grants of land — September 16, 1776. 

2. Seven years half pay to those who should serve to the end of the 
war— May 18, 1778. 

3. Seven years half pay, in specie or current money, to the supernu- 
merary officers, to commence January 1, 1781 ; as also grants of land — 
October 3, 1780. 

4. Not being able to meet the half pay of a single year, in specie or 
current money, they increase the seven years half pay to half pay 
during life— October 21, 1780. 

5. As peace had been conquered, and the Government were unable 
to pay the officers their arrears for monthly pay, or to make any pro- 
vision for their half pay during life, they then resorted to another expe- 

3 



34 

dient, of promising the officers five years full pay, in specie or securities, 
with interest, payable annually — March 22, 1783. 

6. Not being able to pay or secure this small amount of their claim, 
resorted to another desperate expedient, and caused the Paymaster 
General to issue and send to the officers more of these repudiated cer- 
tificates, as specie and securities. 

7. Not being able to pay the interest of a single year, repudiate them. 
Finally, resorted to a funding act, by which the new Government 

propose an arrangement by which there is to be no distinction between 
the officer who has been charged twenty-four hundred dollars in com- 
mutation, and the person to whom he has sold them at the value fixed 
by law — for sixty dollars. And the new Government does not agree to 
pay the proportion named, but only obtained the right to do so, if the 
Government thought proper ; requiring about forty years to test the 
ability and inclination of the Government, from the time they were 
funded. 

Having waited seventeen years after the peace for warrants of their 
lands, many of them were compelled to take them while claimed by 
hostile savages, and defend their possession by arms. 

But, as it has already been remarked, all these considerations have 
been fully considered by Congress, and the principles adopted will apply 
all the payments made under the act of 1828 to the payment of the 
interest ; and if any balance of interest remains, Congress may think 
proper the present time to suspend the same, without imposing any 
forced condition that it shall be in full of all claims. 

But, strange as it may appear, while the present bill deducts these 
valueless certificates, not at the value they were forced upon them, 
(at two dollars and fifty cents to the hundred,) but at their face, the 
bill contemplates the payment of nothing, except the half pay which 
accrued beyond the amount of those certificates ; and yet, during the 
same Congress in which the report of the Court of Claims was adopted, 
giving principal and interest to one of the claimants, the bill which had 
once passed the Senate, and afterwards the House, was postponed, 
although allowing so small a portion of the claim, and containing'a pro- 
vision that it should be in full of all claims. 

The present bill will give the claimants included the following sums, 
assuming the whole number entitled to half pay to be 2,220. The cal- 
culations of human life and statistics of the country give the following 
results : 

EXCLUDED BY THE PRESENT BILL. 

Of the whole number died before 1794 ----- 375 

Of whom were never married ______ 300 

Of those who were married, and died without issue - 300 
Of those who were married, leaving issue, where children and 

grandchildren are also dead - - - - - - 275 

Total . _ _ - 1,250 



This number deducted from 2,220, leaves 1,070 who would be enti- 



35 

tied, not excluding those who have received their half pay by private 
acts. Allowing the pay of captain to be the average, it would amount 
to $245,200 per annum, and allowing the aggregate of life over the 
ten years to have been seven years. 

There is now due this class of claimants, which are embraced in this 
bill, one million six hundred and seventy -six thousand four hundred 
dollars, not including interest, which the present bill excludes, and this 
would operate as a very gradual call upon the Treasury for that amount — 
first six months, $500,000; second six months, $500,000; third six 
months, $200,000 — and so on. 

Strange to relate, the present bill before the Senate, embracing so 
small a pittance of these just claims, excluding and suspending all the 
balance of the claims, was reported in February, 1854, and passed the 
Senate. A similar bill passed the House the last Congress, but was 
postponed in the Senate to the next Congress. 

It seems a strange way to avoid the payment of just claims, to delay 
from year to year until the claimants become disheartened and die, and 
then restrict the proposition to pay a pittance of the claims to the few 
who may have survived. 

There was a time when that just maxim of law prevailed, " That no 
party should take any advantage of his own wrong;" which was con- 
sidered as much binding upon Governments as upon the people. 

It would seem those claims commended themselves to Congress and 
to General Washington, by the highest considerations which a sense of 
justice and gratitude could inspire, as appears by an — 

i XTRACT FROM A CIRCULAR LETTER FROM HIS EXCELLENCY GEORGE 
WASHINGTON, COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE ARMIES OF THE UNITED 
STATES OF AMERICA, TO THE GOVERNORS OF THE SEVERAL STATES. 

" Headquarters, Newburgh, June 18, 1783. 

il The ability of the country to discharge the debts which have been 
incurred in its defence is not to be doubted. An inclination, I flatter 
myself, will not be wanting. The path of our duty is plain before us ; 
honesty will be found, on every experiment, to be the best and only 
true policy. Let us, then, as a nation, be just ; let us fulfil the public 
contracts which Congress had undoubtedly a right to make, for the pur- 
pose of carrying on the war, with the same good faith we suppose our- 
selves bound to perform private engagements. 

" In this state of absolute freedom and perfect security, who will 
grudge to yield a very little of his property to support the common 
interests of society, and to insure the protection of Government 1 
Who does not remember the frequent declarations, at the commence- 
ment of the war, that we should be completely satisfied, if, at the ex- 
pense of one half, we could defend the remainder of our possessions 1 

" Where is the man to be found who wishes to remain indebted for 
the defence of his own person and property, to the exertions, the 
bravery, and the blood of others, without making the generous effort 
to pay the debt of honor and gratitude? In what part of the conti- 
nent shall we find a man, or body of men, who would not blush to 
stand up and propose measures, purposely calculated to rob the sol- 



36 

dier of his stipend, and the public creditor of his due 1 And were it 
possible that such a flagrant instance of injustice could ever happen, 
would it not excite the general indignation, and tend to bring down 
upon the authors of such measures the aggravated vengeance of Heaven 1 
" For my own part, conscious of having acted, while a servant of the 
public, in the manner I conceived best suited to promote the interests 
of my country ; having, in consequence of my fixed belief, in some 
measure pledged myself to the army that their country would finally 
do them complete and ample justice, and not willing to conceal any 
instance of my official conduct from the eyes of the world, I have 
thought proper to transmit to your Excellency the enclosed collection 
of papers, relative to the half pay and commutation granted by Con- 
gress to the officers of the army. 

" From those communications my decided sentiment will be clearly 
comprehended, together with the conclusive reasons which induced 
me at an early period to recommend the adoption of this measure in 
the most earnest and serious manner. 

" As the proceedings of Congress, the army, and myself, are open to 
all, and contain, in my opinion, sufficient information to remove the 
prejudice and errors which have been entertained by any, I think it 
unnecessary to say anything more than just to observe, that the res- 
olutions of Congress now alluded to are undoubtedly as absolutely 
binding upon the United States as the most solemn acts of confedera- 
tion or legislation. 

"As to the idea which I am informed has in some instances pre- 
vailed, that the half pay and commutation are to be regarded merely 
in the odious light of a pension, it ought to be exploded forever. 

" That provision should be viewed as it really was, a reasonable 
compensation offered by Congress, at a time when they had nothing 
else to give to officers of the army for services then to be performed. 

" It was the only means to prevent a total dereliction of the service; 
it was a part of their hire. 

" I may be allowed to say, it was the price of their blood and of 
your independency. 

"It is therefore more than a common debt ; it is a debt of honor ; it 
can never be considered as a pension or gratuity, nor cancelled until 
it is fairly discharged." 

The action of Congress in relation to the claims of the officers may 
not be found uninteresting. 

As early as 1810, while the country was suffering great depression 
from the effects of the debt of the Revolution, an embargo of many 
years, and a war threatened with England, then, even then, they were 
admitted to be justly due. Forty-seven years ago, the officers then, in 
view of the impoverished state of the treasury at that time, proposed 
to deduct the whole amount of those repudiated commutation certifi- 
cates, and receive their half pay from the time of the peace to the time 
of their death, (being the same terms which are contemplated in the 
bill of Senator Evans.) The committee to whom was referred their 
petition for half pay reported that the contract of 1780 had not been 



37 

substantially complied with, and recommended the following resolution : 

" Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner is reasonable, and 
' ought to be granted." 

The gloomy anticipations of a long, expensive war with England, post- 
poned any further action until after the close of that war. 

The claims of the officers for half pay were again presented soon 
after the war, even while the impoverished state of the treasury still 
continued ; and that, too, after the passage of the indigent pension act of 
March 18, 1818, which act was not confined to those officers and sol- 
diers who served to the end of the war. All who had served nine months 
were entitled to its benefits. Yet, after the passage of this act of 
March 18, 1818, on the 7th of December, 1818, the committee of the 
House reported, and proposed to deduct one-eighth from the commuta- 
tion certificates, and pay all the officers the balance. 

President Monroe, in his message of 1819, again called the attention 
of Congress to the claims of these officers, and Mr. Sargent, of the 
House, made a very able report, and proved, beyond all question, the 
justice and legality of these claims, and recommended to allow all the 
officers entitled to half pay from the time of peace, in 1783, to their 
death, deducting the amount of the certificates, agreeably to the terms 
of the petition. 

This claim for half pay was again admitted in the report of Mr. 
Hemphill, of the committee of the House, of January 3, 182b, in which 
he says " that, by virtue of those resolves, a solemn contract between 
the Government and the officers was made, that ought to be observed 
on the part of the Government with the most profound sanctity. That 
when the power of rescision resides exclusively in the bosom of one of 
the parties, it should be exceedingly cautious that justice should be 
done to the other ; that the claims are founded on a contract which 
has not been fairly rescinded, and if it has, there cannot possibly be 
a doubt that the commutation contract has not been fulfilled ; " and 
ecommended allowing the officers their half pay, deducting their com- 
mutation certificates, without any reference to what may have been re- 
covered under the pauper acts of 1818 and 1823. 

Mr. Burges made a very able report to the House, February 11, 
1828, in which the committee say " that, in their opinion, the deliv- 
1 ery of those certificates, as well on general principles as on those 
1 which govern courts of law or equity, did not annul the right of half 
' pay or exonerate the Government from the obligations of the original 
1 contract. Such of those officers as had survived the war, and contin- 
1 ued in the service until the peace, became severally and individually 
' vested with a complete right to the reward of half pay for the residue 
1 of their lives. 

" The reward was gallantly won at the point of the sword ; it was 
i the price of our independence, purchased with blood and sanctioned by 
1 public faith." 

The committee say : " In regard to commissioned officers, Congress, 
< by a resolve of the 22d of March, 1783, offered to those then in the 
' service, as a substitute for this stipulated half pay, the amount of five 



38 • 

years full pay in money or securities, bearing an interest of six per 
cent, per annum, at the option of Congress. These securities were 
to be such as should be given to the other creditors of the United 
States. In the same resolve, there were offered to the officers entitled, 
who had retired from the service on the reform of the army as such, 
substitute certificates to the like amount. To these offers were an- 
nexed two express conditions, viz : First, that they should be accepted 
or refused by lines and corps, and not individually ; and, second, that 
such acceptance or refusal should be signified to Congress by the 
Commander-in-chief, as to the army under his immediate command, 
within two months ; and by the commanding officer of the Southern 
army, as to those under his command, within six months from the date 
of the above resolve of the 22d of March, 1783. At the time these 
offers were made, it is evident, from all the calculations on the prob- 
abilities of human life, that seven years full pay, in advance, would 
have been somewhat less than an equivalent to the half pay for life 
to the younger class of officers, who naturally are the present memo- 
rialists. And your committee are compelled to say, that they have 
discovered no reason why the Government should have denied an indi- 
vidual right of refusing a disadvantageous offer, when the right was 
individual, and considering the Government under the obligation of an 
express, solemn contract. Your committee do not perceive why it 
might not as well have annulled the original right, as to have enforced 
the memorialists to abide by the vote of others, who were interested, 
to put the value of the lives of all upon one equal footing. If, how- 
ever, it should be considered by the House that an assent given in the 
manner prescribed by the resolve is binding upon each individual, 
then your committee beg leave further to observe, that such assent, 
which is to work so much injury and injustice, ought to appear to have 
been given and signified strictly according to the conditions of the 
offer. In examining this part of the subject, your committee do not 
find any signification to Congress of any acceptance, other than a 
notice in the Journals of a report made by the Secretary of War, on 
the 31st of October, 1783, and long after the officers had dispersed, 
that certain lines from New Hampshire to Virginia, inclusive, had 
agreed to accept. This report itself is not to be found, but certain 
it is, that no signification was made to Congress, either by the Com- 
mander-in-chief or the commanding officer of the Southern army, or 
within the times prescribed in the offer ; neither was there ever any resolve 
of Congress specifying such assent, or declaring their option whether 
to pay in money the amount offered, or to give securities for the same, 
on interest. If the offer had been cemplied with, according to its 
sense, your committee are of opinion that the loss of two years full 
pay would have been submitted to, as a new sacrifice, with that pa- 
tience and disinterestedness which were the distinguishing characteris- 
tics of an American officer. But, on a careful examination of this 
matter, 3^our committee have been forced to the conclusion, that the 
offer was not so complied with ; which conclusion results from the 
following considerations, which are most respectfully submitted to the 
House : From the manner of calculating life-annuities, which is by 



♦ 39 

estimating on the one hand the purchase-money with compound inter- 
est, and on the other the probable duration of the life ; from the press- 
ing pecuniary necessities of the officers, and their want of capital to • 
set up, with advantage, in some of the profitable pursuits of civil life ; 
and from the absence of any specification in the resolve as to time — 
it is manifest that it was as well the common understanding of the 
parties, as the legal conclusion, that the offer was to be complied with 
in advance, or in anticipation of the growing annuities. After the 
peace, and after the officers had dispersed, a certificate was sent to 
each individual, indiscriminately, whether he had retired on the reform 
of the army or had continued in the service, that an amount equal to 
five years full pay was due to him, and that such amount, with inter- 
est, was payable to him or bearer. The certificates had no funds 
whereon to rest, and their market value was not equal to one year's 
pay. And it appears to your committee too much to say, that the 
delivery of this almost valueless paper was a payment in money, 
according to the sense of the offer, or that these certificates were the 
securities intended thereby, either according to the common under- 
standing of the term, or the distinction expressly made in the resolve 
itself, between securities and certificates. And these certificates of 
the Paymaster General, or of the commissioners for settling army ac- 
counts, were not securities to any creditor of the United States, until 
registered or funded, more than the other floating certificates of the 
Quartermaster General or the Commissary General, which were issued 
and made payable with interest under the express resolves of Congress 
during the period of the war. Under these considerations, your com- 
mittee, in the choice of the alternative, are obliged to say that in their 
opinion the delivery of these certificates, as well on general principles 
as on those which govern in courts of law or equity, did not annulthe 
right to half pay, or exonerate the Government from the obligations 
of the original contract in this regard." 

It may be well to remember, in connection with these claims, that 
long after the passage of the acts of May 15, 1828, and June 7, 1832, 
and after the act of July 6, 1836, in behalf of the widows, the Senate 
Committee on Revolutionary Claims, May 11, 1838, reported that, 

" After an assiduous investigation, the committee conclude that no 
legislation subsequent to the 21st October, 1780, could, or that by a 
fair construction did, contravene or in any manner impair the claim 
of the officers of the army, or any class of such officers, to the half 
pay promised them by the act of October 21, 1780. The half pay 
for life contracted by the act of October, 1780, to be paid to the offi- 
cers of the army for certain services to be performed by them, instanta 
became a vested right, of which subsequent legislation nor nothing 
whatever could divest the officer, save a failure on his part to perform 
the prescribed service. And it would be a libel on the good sense 
and justice of the distinguished statesmen and patriots of that period, 
to imagine, even, that any legislation subsequent to the 21st of Octo- 
ber, 1780, had for its object to impair the deliberate engagement made 
by that act to allow half pay for life to the officers of the army." 



40 

It ought not to be forgotten that all of the committees of Congress 
to whom these claims have been referred have all united in the con- 
clusion, that those commutation certificates sent to the officers were 
not at that time of the value of one-eighth their nominal amount, and 
that each and all of them have recommended their payment. 

Senator Evans, of South Carolina, on the 6th February, 1854, 
reported a bill in behalf of those claims, which passed the Senate, but 
was not reached in the House the 33d Congress. The House, of the 
34th Congress, passed a similar bill, which placed the claims upon legal 
grounds. This bill was postponed in the Senate. 

The bill was advocated by Senators Evans of South Carolina, Bell 
of New Hampshire, Foster of Connecticut, Seward of New York, Crit- 
tenden of Kentucky, and many others. 



SEVEN YEARS HALF PAY, 

PROMISED UNDER THE RESOLVE OF AUGUST 24, 1T80. 



The next contract for our consideration, which is also embraced in 
the present bill, is that of seven years half pay, promised under the 
resolve of August 24, 1780. 

In order that they may be fully comprehended, I subjoin the several 
acts of Congress upon which they are based. 
The first act is that of August 26, 1776. 

The second act is the following resolution of September 16, 1776 : 
" Resolved, That in addition to money bounty of twenty dollars to 
each non-commissioned and private soldier, Congress make provision 
for granting land, in the following proportions, to the officers and sol- 
diers who shall engage in the service, and continue therein to the 
close of the war, or until discharged by Congress, and to the repre- 
sentatives of such officers and soldiers as shall be slain by the enemy, 
viz : to a colonel, 500 acres ; lieutenant colonel, 450 ; major, 400 ; 
captain, 300 ; lieutenant, 200 ; ensign, 150 ; each non-commissioned 
officer and soldier, 150 acres." 

This was extended, by resolve of September 18, 1776, " to all who 
are or shall be enlisted for that term." This was " extended to the 
general officers," in the following proportions : major general, 1,100 
acres ; brigadier general, 850 acres — August 12, 1780. September 22, 
1780, it was extended " to the several officers of the medical depart- 
ment, except the clerks and stewards." 

It will be seen that the act of August 26, 1776, was very full in all 
its provisions for pensions for wounds received anterior to that date, 
which was further extended by the act of September 25, 1778. 

RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, AUGUST 26, 1776. 

" 1. Military officers, non-commissioned officers, and private soldiers, 
who shall lose a limb, or be otherwise totally disabled, in the line of 
their duty, to receive a pension per month equal to half their monthly 
pay as officers or soldiers of the United States. 

" 2. Commanders of ships, officers, marines, or seamen, belonging to 
the United States, who shall lose a limb, or be otherwise totally dis- 
abled, in engagements in which no prize is taken, to receive a monthly 
pension equal to one-half their monthly pay as officers, seamen, or 
marines ; but in case a prize be taken, their respective profits thereof 
shall be computed as part of their pension, and deducted accordingly. 

" 3. Officers, seamen, and soldiers, in the army or navy of the United 
States, who shall be wounded in an engagement, and rendered incapa- 



42 

ble of serving in the army or navy, but not totally disabled, to receive 
an adequate monthly pension, not to exceed their half pay. 

"4. Provided, respectively, that in every such case of wound or 
disability, such officer, soldier, seaman, or marine, shall produce the 
evidence required to substantiate the facts of his wound or other dis- 
ability in such engagement. 

" 5. The Legislatures of the several States recommended to appoint 
proper persons to receive and examine such evidence, and to register 
the same ; also, what support is adjudged by the Legislature of their 
State ; and the pa) 7 ments made from time to time to be reported to 
Congress, or to the ' Board of War.' 

" 6. And that the Legislatures cause such payments to be made on 
account of the United States. 

" 7. Provided that all such officers and soldiers, capable of guard or 
garrison dntj, be formed into a corps of invalids ; and also said naval 
officers, marines, and seamen, capable of doing any duty in the navy, 
be so employed." 

" Relief is extended to officers and non-commissioned officers of the 
army and navy, and to soldiers, seamen, and marines, who had, ante- 
rior to the resolve of the 26th of August, 1777, lost a limb, or been 
otherwise disabled, such as that granted by said resolution." 

RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, SEPTEMBER 25, 1778. 

a The Board of War brought in a report, which was taken into 
consideration. Whereupon, Congress came to the following reso- 
lution : 

" 1. Whereas Congress, by a resolve passed on the 26th of August, 
1776, made provision for commissioned and non-commissioned officers, 
officers of the army and navy, as also for the private soldiers, marines, 
and seamen, who should thereafter lose a limb in any engagement, or 
be otherwise so disabled in the service of the United States of Amer- 
ica as to render them incapable afterwards of getting a livelihood ; 
and whereas divers officers and others have lost limbs, or been other- 
wise disabled as aforesaid,, before the said 26th of August, to whom 
the like relief ought, equitably, equally to be extended — 

" Resolved, That all provisions and regulations contained in the said 
resolve of August 26, 1776, shall extend to all persons who lost a 
limb, or are otherwise disabled as aforesaid, in the service of the 
United Colonies or States of America, before the said 26th of August 
and since the commencement of hostilities, on the 19th of April, 1775. 

" 2. And whereas doubts may arise, in some cases, whether certain 
persons, maimed or disabled, and claiming pensions, were at the time 
in the service of the said Colonies or States : for removing the same." 

" Resolved, That every commissioned and non-commissioned officer, 
and private man, who, since the commencement of hostilities, as afore- 
said, has been, or hereafter shall be, drawn forth for the common de- 
fence, (and not for the service of any particular State,) or who has 
turned out, or shall hereafter turn out, voluntarily, to oppose the 
enemies of the said United Colonies or States, upon any sudden attack 
or invasion, or upon any enterprise carried on under their authority, 



43 

and in such service has lost or shall lose a limb, or has been or 
shall be otherwise disabled, as aforesaid, shall be entitled to the 
pension allowed in said resolve of August 26th, 1776 ; provided that 
any such commissioned or non-commissioned officer, or private man, 
being found capable of doing guard or garrison duty, shall be subject 
thereto, and serve in the corps of invalids when required, or, on re- 
fusing so to do, shall be struck off the list of pensioners ; unless the 
person so refusing have a family, or be otherwise peculiarly circum- 
stanced, and the Governor or President and Council of the State he 
belongs to, or in which he resides, are of opinion an exception should 
be made in his favor, and an exemption granted him from such ser- 
vice, a certificate of which opinion he shall produce, previous to his 
receiving his pension. 

" And whereas it may happen that many persons, maimed or disa- 
bled, as aforesaid, by reason of their falling into the hands of the 
enemy, the deaths of their officers and surgeons, or other accidents, 
may not have it in their power to procure the certificates required by 
the afore-mentioned resolve, to entitle them to their pensions : 

" Resolved, That in such cases application be made to the Governor 
or President and Council of the State to which any person maimed or 
disabled, as aforesaid, belongs, or in which he resides, and upon 
showing to him or them satisfactory proof that he was maimed or dis- 
abled in the manner before mentioned, and producing his or their cer- 
tificate thereof, he shall be entitled to and receive a pension, in like 
manner as if he produced the certificate required by the said resolve." 

Then follows the resolve of August 24, 1780, referred to in the bill 

now before the Senate. 

RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, AUGUST 24, 1780. 

Half pay for seven years granted to officers, &c, extended to widows and orphans of 

those officers, &c. 

" Resolved, That the resolution of the 15th day of May, 1778, 
granting half pay for seven years to the officers of the army who 
should continue in service to the end of the war, be extended to the 
widows of those officers who have died or shall hereafter die in the 
service, to commence from the time of such officer's death, and con- 
tinue for the term of seven years ; or if there be no widow, or in case 
of her death or intermarriage, the said half pay be given to the orphan 
children of the officer, dying as aforesaid, if he shall have left any ; 
and that it be recommended to the Legislatures of the respective 
States to which such officers belong, to make provision for paying the 
same, on account of the United States." 
The next resolve is that of October 3, 1780, when the army was 

reorganized, to take effect the 1st of January, 1781 : 

" Resolved, That from the time the reform of the army takes place, 

' they be entitled to half pay for seven years, in specie or other current 

1 money equivalent, and also grants of land at the close of the war, 

' agreeably to the resolution of September, 1776." 

The first act of Congress to induce service in the army was that of 

August 26, 1776. It provided a reward not exceeding half pay to all 



44 

who should be wounded in the service, in proportion to the injury and 
disability, during life, or the end of said disability. The next is the 
act of September 16, 1776, which made each of the officers and soldiers 
who were then in service, and continued therein during the war, and 
the representatives of those who were slain by the enemy, in addition 
to bounty money, to grants of land, in the proportions therein named. 

The next act as a further inducement to serve is that of May 15, 1778. 
This act was additional and supplementary to the act of September 16, 
1776, granting seven years half pay to those officers who were commis- 
sioned by Congress, who then were or thereafter should be in the ser- 
vice of the United States, and continue therein during the war. 

The next act of Congress was that of September 25, 1778, which is 
additional to and explanatory of the act of August 26, 1776 ; and as it 
is subsequent to the act of May 15, 1778, may also be considered ex- 
planatory of that act, and thereby extending the same. 

The next act is that of August 24, 1780, which provides that the 
provisions of the resolve of May 15, 1778, for seven years half pay, 
promised to those officers who shall serve to the end of the war, should 
extend to the widows of those officers " who have died or shall hereafter 
* die, or in case of their death or intermarriage , that the said half pay 
' to be given to the orphan children of the officer, if he shall have left 
' any." This act is additional to the bounty-land act of September 
16, 1776, and applies the continued service of the act of May 15, 
1778, to that of the death service, but did not thereby intend to make 
the grant less certain or less extensive, but it only sought to secure it 
in the officer's family, up to a certain point, by priority of right in the 
application of payment. 

The several resolves constitute a solemn contract for land and seven 
years half pay. It cannot be considered in the light of a gratuity, 
wherein the grant may be intentionally restricted, as in cases where the 
party may have received the consideration promised under the contract 
for the full term of the time named in the contract ; in that case, of an 
extension of the seven years in addition, may be viewed as a gratuity. 
But if the officer was killed, or died within the service, and comes 
within the provision of the act, the seven years half pay, it would seem, 
became due immediately, together with the land. If the widow and 
children are dead, it would by law descend to the grandchildren. The 
grant will not for that reason be lost. The resolve of October 3, 1780, 
was passed subsequeiit to either of the other acts, which promises seven 
years half pay to each of the supernumerary officers, in specie or current 
money ; " also, grants of land at the close of the war, agreeably to the 
resolution of 16th September, 1776." It does not make any priority 
of payees, because it was in all probability to be paid to those officers 
themselves ; but the practice of Congress has been to protect its pay- 
ment, for the benefit of the children, in all cases of the seven years half 
pay, where the widow had deceased or intermarried. 

It will be observed that Congress adopted measures with reference 
to invalids by 






45 

RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, JUNE 7, 1785. 

u Resolved, That it be, and it is hereby, recommended to the several 
1 States, to make provision for officers, soldiers, or seamen, who have 
* been disabled in the service of the United States, in the following 
' manner : 

The recommendation of Congress to the States to provide for invalids of the army and navy, 
resident in the States, respectively . 

" Section 1. List to be made out. 2. Certificate necessary. 3. 
Pensions to disabled officers equal to half pay, and rateable allowance 
to non-commissioned officers and privates. 4. Each State to appoint 
persons to examine claimants. 5. Each State authorized to pay. 6. 
Any State may form invalid corps. 7. Quarterly returns of invalid 
corps. 8. Invalids to take an oath. 9. Magistrates to send affi- 
davits." 

Many of these pensions were paid by the individual States ; hence 
the necessity of limiting the time of presentation of many claims, wher- 
ever the order of priority of payees existed. By the act of June 11, 
1788, each State shall have credit with the United States for invalid 
pensions. The act of September 29, 1789, the military pensions 
granted and paid by the States to be paid by the United States, for the 
space of one year, under such regulations as the President of the United 
States may direct, and the act of July 16, 1790, carried the provisions 
forward another year. Up to this time, " no provision had been made 
for the discharging of the arrears of pensions due to officers, non-com- 
missioned officers, and soldiers, who were wounded and disabled 
whilst in the service of the United States ; " and the third section of 
the act provides that a certificate shall issue for the amount, " and in 
case of the death of any person so entitled, the certificate shall pass 
to his heirs -or legal representatives, or representatives." The fourth 
section, which applies to the widow or orphan of each officer, &c, &c. : 
shall receive a certificate therefor, in like manner and on the same 
principles as certificates are by this act directed to be given to officers, 
non-commissioned officers, and soldiers who were wounded or disabled 
as aforesaid." Under those and many subsequent acts of Congress, 
a large number of the seven years half pay claims originally due to the 
widows and orphans have been paid, and many of them have been paid 
with the interest. Priority of payees was made to secure it against 
the liabilities of debts, and not to exclude it from the children or grand- 
children. If the payment has been delayed by the Government for 
many years after the peace, until the widow and children may have de- 
ceased, Congress it would seem would consider the grandchildren 
equally entitled to the amount of the seven years half pay, and have 
often paid the same to the grandchildren. If the claim ever vested in 
the officer, it cannot be lost for want of continuance of priority of 
payees, it will follow the land portion of the consideration, and become 
payable to the representatives of the officer. But if Congress had the 
power to insert in the resolve the right of priority of payees, as far as 
the widow and orphan, it would have the same right to extend it to the 
grandchildren. Contracts are always construed with the most strict- 



46 

ness against the grantor ; and a forfeiture of consideration is never re- 
garded with favor, especially in behalf of the State. A contract of A with 
B, wherein A agrees to pay B a sum, this is payable to B and his heirs. 
Here the consideration of the contract itself contemplates the price of life 
and death of the grantee ; and the 'presumption of law is, that so far he 
has agreed, and that it is his nearest choice ; that it should be secured 
to his widow and children first, and then the law would add his grand- 
children, as he would wish to have it. Equity, justice, and the princi- 
of humanity, would seem to dictate that it should be protected to the 
grandchildren. 

But the claimants urge that the claim for seven years half pay does 
not depend entirely upon the resolve of August 24, 1780 ; that the 
land portion of the contract, being a part of the consideration, and that 
the renewal of the seven years half pay for the continued service was 
the same, in all its relations to the Government, as the death service ; 
and as the continued service has no priority of payees, and that the act 
of 3d October, 1780, gave the seven years half pay, " and also the land, 
agreeably to the resolve of September 16, 1776 ; " that all the consid- 
erations were blended, and wherever the seven years half pay was 
added, it became subject to the same disposition with that of the land 
portion of the contract, beyond the termination of priority of the payees 
named by Congress. 

The claimants urge that, in many eases, the mother and orphan 
children died while waiting for the suspension of limitation acts and 
readiness on the part of the Government. They further urge that they 
ought not to be estopped from receiving said seven years half pay, 
because the time for granting the land portion of the contract has been 
extended from 1802, by many acts of Congress since 1802, up to June, 
1858, which has renewed all portions of the contract up to the present 
time. 

The construction of the acts of May and August, as expressly set 
forth by the acts of Congress, have established — 

1. That they apply to those widows and orphans of those officers 
who were killed or died previous to May 15, 1775, as well as those 
who died subsequently. 

2. That the act of August 24, 1780, extends as well to the widows 
and orphans of those officers who were killed after the adoption of the 
army by Congress, on the 15th of June, 1775, and more especially of 
those who were killed after the 27th of June, 1775, when Washington 
took command of the army, as those who were killed after that time. 

3. That Congress luive, by public and private acts, made the claim 
of the heirs and payees of the seven years half pay coextensive with that 
of the land portion of the contract, and have paid the same to the 
representative of the grandchildren of the officer, (who was killed.) 

Many cases may be found to sustain this position. I will only refer 
to that of John M. Gregory, grandson of Lieutenant John Gregory, of 
the army of the Revolution, June 3, 1834. (Session acts, page 143.) 

4. That the claim for seven years half pay is in addition to, and a 
part of, the same contract, granting land under the resolve of Septem- 
ber 16, 1776 — the consideration of each being founded upon the death 



47 

of the officer ; and as the land portion of the contract is declared by 
the act itself to go to the representatives of the deceased officer, so must 
the half pay, after the order of priority of payees, declared in the act, 
have terminated — that is, after the death of the widow and children, it 
shall descend in the same manner as though no priority of payees had 
been named ; and if Congress saw fit to secure it against debts thus far, 
it was done for the benefit of the payees. That the several acts created 
a solemn contract on the part of the Government with those officers, 
that, in case of the death of the officer, it gave to the widow and chil- 
dren a vested right to seven years half pay, as soon as death occurred ; 
and in case of the death of the widow and children before Congress 
paid the same, then by law, as well as by the act of 1776, it became 
payable to the legal representatives of the children, unless Congress 
think proper to secure the same to the grandchildren. (Secretary's 
decision in case of McKenny.) If this was not so, the delay of pay- 
ment on the part of the Government would defeat the rights of many 
claimants. 

The half pay is made by the express words of the act to commence 
at the death of the officer. Many of those officers were killed or died 
in service in 1776, and yet Congress made no provision for giving to 
each officer his portion of the land until after 1800, (twenty-four years 
after the death,) and none for the half pay until 1790, (fourteen years 
after the decease of the officer.) 

A party cannot, by any rules known to law or equity, delay the pay- 
ment until the original party to whom the same was payable is dead, 
and then refuse to pay it to his representative. 

5. The claimants further urge, that the laws of Congress in behalf 
of the heirs of many of those officers of the same class of claimants whose 
right is founded exclusively on the same law, established by the same 
rules of evidence, is a legislative construction and a public declaration 
of the rights of all the heirs of the other officers. They are some of 
the laws made by the authority of Congress, and some of the laws which 
the Constitution declares " shall be the supreme law of the land." 

It is only by those principles by which all the highest tribunals of 
justice are governed. A law which they may establish in relation to 
one individual claimant shall be equally binding upon all others whose 
claims are founded upon the same contract, and governed by the same 
rules of evidence. The Constitution and the most sacred principles 
which are known to the administration of all law, is impartial and equal 
justice ; and as no individual can avail himself of his own negligence 
or his own wrong in the suspension of a contract, the rule should be 
applied with still more force to the administration of the Government, 
which is always bound to insure to its citizens impartial and equal 
justice. 

In relation to interest, the action of Congress has been somewhat 
fluctuating during an intermediate space of time. The more recent 
action of Congress and the Court of Claims has been to admit the resolve 
of June 3, 1784, as binding on the Government, and both concurred in 
allowing interest on the half-pay claims ; which was admitted last (the 
34th) Congress, in the name of the son of Dr. Absalom Baird, claimed 



48 

by the son, and fully referred to in the consideration of half-pay claims 
under the resolution of October 21, 1780. 

The Court of Claims, it would seem, decided, in the case of Joshua 
R. Jewett vs. the United States, that only those officers who were 
commissioned by Congress, in the continental line, were entitled to 
bounty land* 

2. That it must be shown that an application has been made to the 
proper executive departments for the bounty land, before that Court 
can take jurisdiction of the claim. 

3. That unless there had been some record of the allowance of the 
land, and that of the service, these claims would be barred by the 
statute of limitations of November 2, 1785, and February 12, 1793. 

Also, David Noble vs. United States. 

As the promise of the land was in " addition " to, and a portion of 
the reward of seven years half pay, founded upon the consideration of 
the same service, and depending upon the same rules of evidence, the 
suspension of the acts of limitation in behalf of the one, would apply 
with equal force to the other ; and as the land portion of the contract 
has been extended to the 26th of June, 1858, the seven years half pay 
portion has also been extended by the same acts. Each being a part 
of the same contract, one must be coextensive with the other in all its 
relations. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 800 525 9 



\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





011 800 525 9 



